GMO Opinion Paper
June 24, 2013
Since the prehistoric development of agriculture, the relationship with the earth has tenuous. Humans have been perpetually trying to coax more from land by fostering fertility and warding off pests through a variety of methods, the most recent of which is the genetic modification of organisms. When compared to the chemical heavy “conventional” farming techniques that have been in use since the “Green Revolution” of the early 20th century, GM has increased yield in some cases and a decreased the use of toxic pesticides. However, I contend that the potential increased yield seen from GM crops is not worth implementing, since organic farming-the synthesis of many different low impact practices-has been shown to be incredibly energy efficient, can provide enough food to feed the world’s current and future populations, and presents a multi- faceted response to a multi-faceted issue.
Although my research did not turn up any studies which directly compared organic farming to GMO farming, I did find studies comparing organic to conventional, and those showed that an organic approach to farming was farm more efficient when considering water, power, chemical input, expenditure of fuel, etc. (Gundogmus). There are studies showing that farming with GM seeds uses less energy in the forms of human labor and chemical pesticides, however the amount of money developing and marketing the technology was not taken into effect. It would be very interesting to see a comparative analysis of GM and organic farming that examines the time and energy expended in the entire context.
June 24, 2013
Since the prehistoric development of agriculture, the relationship with the earth has tenuous. Humans have been perpetually trying to coax more from land by fostering fertility and warding off pests through a variety of methods, the most recent of which is the genetic modification of organisms. When compared to the chemical heavy “conventional” farming techniques that have been in use since the “Green Revolution” of the early 20th century, GM has increased yield in some cases and a decreased the use of toxic pesticides. However, I contend that the potential increased yield seen from GM crops is not worth implementing, since organic farming-the synthesis of many different low impact practices-has been shown to be incredibly energy efficient, can provide enough food to feed the world’s current and future populations, and presents a multi- faceted response to a multi-faceted issue.
Although my research did not turn up any studies which directly compared organic farming to GMO farming, I did find studies comparing organic to conventional, and those showed that an organic approach to farming was farm more efficient when considering water, power, chemical input, expenditure of fuel, etc. (Gundogmus). There are studies showing that farming with GM seeds uses less energy in the forms of human labor and chemical pesticides, however the amount of money developing and marketing the technology was not taken into effect. It would be very interesting to see a comparative analysis of GM and organic farming that examines the time and energy expended in the entire context.
Champions of GMOs assert that they are necessary to combat the issues of world hunger-particularly in the third world, and malnutrition- particularly deficiencies in iron and vitamin A. However, some scholars, like Peter Rosset, argue that there already exists enough food to sufficiently nourish every person in the world. The real problem is lack of infrastructure, inequities in distribution, and disparities in education, income, and social status. Implementation of GM crops in impoverished nations will only serve to engender their complete dependence upon the corporations supplying the seeds, or on the countries supplying the GM crops through food aid (Sherlock). Furthermore, a recent meta-analysis of 293 different studies concluded that if all of the farm land currently in use was converted to organic, that not only would the yield would be more than enough to support the world’s population for the foreseeable future, but that it would also increase sustainability through mitigating the need for chemical fertilizers (Badgeley).
The aforementioned meta-analysis also touches on the important point that GM crops only answer one problem at a time with one solution: drought tolerant genes for dry climates, vitamin enhanced genes for malnourished populations, herbicide resistant genes for reduction of herbicide use. But the picture of agriculture is so much bigger than that. What is needed is an approach, which encompasses pest control, fertilization, low-impact use of the earth, practices which are both socially and ecologically sustainable, and a flexible mindset. An organic farmer sees their crop in a larger context of time and space, and has the inclination to delve into a rich repository of historical wisdom and new scientific practices in order to create a custom response to whatever nature throws his way by using a variety of different seeds, cover crops, biological pesticides, companion plants, compost, and/or manure. This flexibility is helpful in hedging one’s genetic bet
against different strains of virulence. In a polyculture field, if one plant variety is
afflicted by a virus, for example, the others still have a chance at survival. A field of
monoculture-as seen with GM and conventional crops-is left completely vulnerable to
whatever afflictions develop resistance to their defensive measures. A farmer using GM
crops generally just has one type of seed to plant and a handful of fertilizers and
pesticides to use.
It’s unequivocal that something must be done to change the predominant ways in which foods are grown, however I can’t help but see GMOs as simply another extension of the same paradigm, which attempts to reduce agriculture to a simple equation of input and output. GMOs are certainly not the only way, and probably not the best way, to conserve energy, feed the world’s masses, and address the need to create an agrarian infrastructure which is environmentally and sociologically sustainable.
References
Badgeley, C. et al. (2007). Organic agriculture and the global food supply. Renewable agriculture and food systems. 22. 86-108
Gundogmus, E. (2006). Energy use on organic farming: A comparative analysis on organic versus conventional apricot production on small holdings in Turkey. Energy Conversion and Management. 47. 3351–3359.
Sherlock, R., Morrey, J. (2002). Ethical issues in biotechnology. 175-178.
It’s unequivocal that something must be done to change the predominant ways in which foods are grown, however I can’t help but see GMOs as simply another extension of the same paradigm, which attempts to reduce agriculture to a simple equation of input and output. GMOs are certainly not the only way, and probably not the best way, to conserve energy, feed the world’s masses, and address the need to create an agrarian infrastructure which is environmentally and sociologically sustainable.
References
Badgeley, C. et al. (2007). Organic agriculture and the global food supply. Renewable agriculture and food systems. 22. 86-108
Gundogmus, E. (2006). Energy use on organic farming: A comparative analysis on organic versus conventional apricot production on small holdings in Turkey. Energy Conversion and Management. 47. 3351–3359.
Sherlock, R., Morrey, J. (2002). Ethical issues in biotechnology. 175-178.
