GMO products spread in SADC - Study

SIFELANI TSIKO
Correspondent | Friday May 25, 2007 00:00

A preliminary GMO Spread Survey report done by the Biotechnology Trust of Zimbabwe in collaboration with the Community Technology Development Trust, Tobacco Research Board and other research institutes in Zambia, Namibia and Swaziland even shows areas where GM crops are suspected to be grown.

The 12-month GMO Spread Survey was done in five Southern African countries that included Malawi, Namibia, Swaziland, Zambia and Zimbabwe between January and December last year.

Sources said the survey was conducted to identify potentially modified products in these selected countries and to identify modes and mechanisms of entry as well as distribution of GMOs in these five countries.

A total of 229 questionnaires were distributed and survey responses of about 27 percent were achieved mostly from experts in the field of biotechnology.

'The results obtained from this survey are preliminary and should not be generalised for countries where the survey was done. Rather these are the views of the respondents.
'These results, though, are indicative of the situation in the region and give a reflection of the population,' the GMO Spread Survey preliminary report stated.

The major concern cited in all the countries under the study was human health and safety (30 percent), followed by fear of contamination of indigenous resources by GMOs (26 percent).

About 10 percent of the respondents were worried that GMOs would be used to undermine the country's economic and political sovereignty while five percent were concerned at the lack of policy to regulate biotechnology.

The report noted that a higher percentage of responses, on a country basis, were from Zambia and Malawi where advocacy work was stronger than other countries.

Suspected GMO products in the five countries included maize, cotton and soyabean, livestock feed, tobacco, bananas, potatoes, poultry products and vegetables.
The majority of respondents (38 percent) believed maize contributed most to GMO products followed by cotton (13 percent), livestock feed (nine percent) and soyabean (eight percent).

Malawi indicated a higher percentage for yellow maize (17 percent) with equal distribution of (14 percent) for potatoes, white maize and livestock feed.

Zambia had a high percentage for white maize (19 per cent), yellow maize (15 percent) and an equal distribution of 10 percent for poultry products, soyabean and cotton.
Zimbabwe had an almost equal distribution of yellow maize (21 percent), white maize (21 percent) and cotton 19 percent.

The report noted that there is no distinction between yellow and white maize despite the fact that South Africa, the identified source of maize food aid, targeted yellow maize for GMO production.

Most African countries still have reservations about genetically modified foods and seeds (GMOs) and only a few countries allow them legally despite having no capacity to prevent their spread.

South Africa has embraced GMOs and as the region's strongest economy, scientists say it could be the portal for them entering the rest of the continent - no matter what individual nations may do, industry watchers and activists say.

In the five countries under the GMO Spread Survey, locations where suspected GMO plants are believed to be grown were those mostly under research and food aid recipient locations in addition to border areas.

In Zambia, suspected areas where GM crops are grown included the Southern, Eastern, Central and Western provinces and points where aid is distributed and refugee camps.
In Zimbabwe, food aid-receiving districts along border areas and research areas were identified as suspected GMO prevalent areas.

In Malawi, research stations were identified as possible growing areas.

'If contamination by transgenic crops is a possibility, then there is need to assess the level of contamination and identify contaminated areas,' researchers suggested in the report.

'The assessments need to be followed up by constant monitoring of the surrounding regions to minimise and control gene flow from transgenic crops to the indigenous varieties. This will assist the control and regulation of any transgenic material present in the region.'

However, the researchers said, if there is a lack of awareness of the growing areas and their existence, effectiveness of regulation becomes questionable.

'Regular assessment and monitoring will allow for the monitoring of the gene-flows assessing the possible implications.

'Enforcement of biosafety regulations will also assist in protecting non-modified crops thereby protecting contamination of farmer varieties,' the report stated.

Opponents of GMOs in Africa fear that the continent's farmers could lose market access to Europe.

European consumers are quite sensitive to GMO foods despite commercial claims that they are safe.

Agricultural experts say if Africa turns to GMO seeds and foods, Europe may not buy them something that may lead to shrinkage of their revenue base or their survival.
Most African countries also have concerns about possible unknown side effects of using GMO products and seed.

According to the latest GMO Spread report, 'walk in' borders are common in all the five countries under the study.

The majority of respondents identified the formal as the major channel of entry of GMOs in their respective countries - through legal channels 31.5 per cent.

Exchange of seed between relatives living on either side of the country borders (19 percent) and border jumping (18 percent) is thought to contribute about 37 percent of respondents to channels of entry into countries. Food aid was mentioned by only 10 percent of the respondents as a potential channel of entry.

Researchers of the GMO Spread report said a policy framework needs to be developed to cater for official border areas as well as illegal and unconscious ways of importing GMO products for farming purposes.

They also suggested that awareness be raised among officials at border posts in addition to farmers regarding the possible contamination of their field crops by GMOs.

The survey showed that one of the main concerns is the contamination of indigenous genetic resources.

The majority of the respondents (48 percent) indicated that biosafety regulations and inspection, phytosanitary regulations and inspection and screening tests are the most common controls in place.

Grinding of grain was mentioned by five percent as one of the strategies of control.
Malawi relied more on biosafety regulations and inspection (50 percent), Zambia mainly used GMO screening tests (35 percent) and inspection by the agriculture ministry and Zimbabwe used a variety of controls such as biosafety regulations and inspection (26 percent), phytosanitary regulations and inspections (14 percent) of all plant and plant products at all official entry points (12 percent) and GM screening tests (10 percent).
Most respondents (18 percent) felt the controls in place were weak due to lack of equipment, inadequate expertise and general lack of tracing mechanisms of GMO products.

The main problems cited in the tracking and safety control mechanisms in the five countries included:

*Lack of technological capacity to screen and detect GMOs (22 percent);
*Shortage of equipment and manpower at the major border posts to effectively carry out inspections (21 per cent);
*Lack of knowledge on the possible effects on environment and biosafety (11 per cent);
*Shortage of GM free seed, feedstocks, foodstuffs (6 per cent);
*Shortage of equipment and manpower at border posts (21 percent);
*Difficulty in curbing border jumping.
*Pollen drift; and
*Corruption and porous borders.

Financial support for equipment procurement, training and for operations of biosafety regulation boards is critical, researchers said.

Poor co-ordination between customs, health and veterinary officers at border posts is also cited as one of the major problems.

Another key challenge is that most products with a GM-related label tested positive for GM, according to another study done by the University of Free State in South Africa. Most people in these five countries and others in the anti-GMO camp are worried by the unregulated movement of foodstuffs through informal trade networks across South Africa's porous borders which fast spread into the entire region.