Author
For further details log on website :
http://www.plantphysiol.org/content/126/1/16.long
- Jesse Machuka
-Author Affiliations
- doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1104/pp.126.1.16Plant Physiology May 1, 2001 vol. 126 no. 1 16-19
- » Full Text
- Full Text (PDF)
- Download Utopia
Jesse Machuka
Few would disagree that the many claims and counterclaims concerning what biotechnology can or cannot do to solve Africa's food insecurity problem have mainly been made by non-Africans. It is no wonder that Florence Wambugu's (1999) excellent article titled “Why Africa needs agricultural biotech” is now widely cited by those who support the view that developing countries, particularly in SubSaharan Africa (SSA), stand to gain the most from modern biotechnology applications. The article explained in a nutshell some of the potential benefits Africa stands to gain by embracing biotechnology. Although opinions differ regarding the role biotechnology can play in African development, all (hopefully!) must agree about the urgency to eradicate the perpetual cycle of hunger, malnutrition, and death in a world of plenty. It is an acknowledged fact that Africa is endowed with tremendous natural (including genetic) and human wealth that has yet to be harnessed to the benefit of its people. Sadly, some of this reservoir of resources have been disintegrating and the trend is bound to accelerate unless urgent measures are taken to stop and reverse this drift. Since farming is the most important source of income and sustenance for about three quarters of the population of SSA, there is no doubt that agricultural biotechnology (agbiotech) can make very substantial contributions toward increasing food production by rural resource-poor farmers, while preserving declining resources such as forests, soil, water, and arable land (Bunders and Broerse, 1991). However, application of modern biotechnology tools is not likely to significantly reduce the contributions that conventional disciplines such as soil science, breeding, plant health management, agronomy, agricultural economics, and social sciences make to enhance crop production.
In villages, constraints to crop production include pests, diseases, weeds, environmental degradation, soil nutrient depletion, low fertilizer inputs, inadequate food processing amenities, poor roads to markets, and general lack of information to make science-based decisions that underlie farming methodologies and systems. For some of these constraints, biotechnology is the most promising recourse to alleviate them. For example, an insect known as Marucapodborer is the major constraint restricting increased grain legume production in Africa, often causing up to 100% crop failure during severe attacks on important crops such as cowpea (Fig. 1). Many decades of conventional breeding efforts have failed to control this pest. However, recent research in U.S. universities and at the International Institute of Tropical Agriculture based in Ibadan, Nigeria, shows that this pest can be controlled by applying biotechnology tools. This is just one of the myriad problems facing food production systems in Africa for which biotechnology can provide at least some solutions. Although biotechnology has potential downsides, the major “concerns” in Africa are not so much about justifying its role in agricultural production—the “why” question. It is conceivable that the millions of dollars being wasted each year by antibiotech activists elsewhere could go a long way to help build badly needed capacity for agbiotech research in Africa! The key issues revolve around questions of where, when, how, and who will do biotechnology for Africa's benefit? If we are thinking of ultimate answers, then there is probably only one answer: biotechnology for Africa should mostly be done in Africa and mostly by Africans themselves, now. And yes, this is being realistic, and it can be done, if there is consensus and goodwill.
Fig. 1.
Podborer larvae infest legume pods. Inset, Podborer larva on cowpea callus in bioassay to test efficacy of cowpea pest resistance characters.
Despite many years of agricultural and other “development” aid and promises by different agencies related to increased food security and poverty eradication, those of us who live in Africa do not have confidence that things are getting any better. Because of this history, some are either pessimistic or skeptical, but the majority remain cautious and optimistic, that modern biotechnology opens new opportunities to address constraints that have led to declining harvests in farmers' fields in the midst of an expanding population. Richard Manning (2000) makes a good point when he suggests that one way to feed the increasing world population is to help “third world scientists to feed their own people, while ensuring sensitivity to culture and environment that we missed in the first green revolution” (http://www.mcknight.org/crop-frontier.htm). For SSA, the pertinent question is, how does the international community of public and private institutions and donors, governments, scientists, and other actors help African scientists (and farmers!) to feed their own people? It is crucial that scientific information reaches farmers in the rural areas who have space to practice farming and that other actors such as agricultural scientists and extensionists interact with farmers to attain acceptance and use of new technologies for sustainable food production and development. In this regard, we must have it in mind that life science technologies that offer hope to farmers, such as agbiotech, belong to the farmer. We must also ensure that the technology not only reaches farmers but that they understand it and are empowered to use it. Furthermore, our starting point is not the “ignorant peasant” but the practices, techniques, experience, and knowledge of the African farmer built over the centuries (Duprez and DeLeener, 1988).
A good example of how biotechnology can reach rural farmers involves a special program by the Biotechnology Development Co-operation of the Netherlands Government, the Kenyan Ministry of Research, Science and Technology, and the small-scale farming system stakeholders. The program structure is designed to ensure that biotechnology reaches the small farmer (end-user) through a bottom-up approach steered by the Kenya Agricultural Biotechnology Platform. The composition of farmers includes male and female farmers, oxen owners, different age groups from different subvillages, etc. Projects under the Kenya Agricultural Biotechnology Platform funding bring together collaborators who include scientists from research institutions such as universities, national agricultural research centers, and farmers. A Farming Systems Research Program ensures that farmers participate in the research as partners with scientists, extensionists, and other actors and enables scientists also to utilize indigenous knowledge in research and development. This prevents “cut and paste” approaches that may be foreign market-driven and which tend to provide short-term, quick-fix solutions to unique problems faced by small-scale farmers in Africa who have developed their own unique crops, cropping, and farming systems that cannot be changed without their full and careful involvement. Since 1992, Farmers Research Groups and Farmers Extension Groups, established along the lines of Farming Systems Research Programs, have been in existence in the Lake Zone of Tanzania for purposes of farmer participatory research. This experience shows that such participatory methods increase farmers' inputs in the decision-making process as well as in the dissemination of research products through their involvement in field trials, farmers' and “on-station” field days, PRA surveys, and farmer-to-farmer diffusion of information through Village Extension Workers rather than institutional extension (Fig. 2). Since Farmers Research Groups represent different geographic zones and hence different agro-ecological and farming systems, linkage mechanisms that bring together their experiences need to be established to allow horizontal and vertical dissemination of technologies as well as collaboration in the SSA region. Obviously, this is not the only way that research results from the laboratory reach farmers' fields, but it illustrates the fact that applied agbiotech research can similarly be targeted and tied to meet specific needs of rural farmers, both in the short- and long-term, in the face of scant resources. With African farmers and scientists working together to set the research agenda, there is hope that the research will focus on uniquely African (“orphan”) crops such as millet and sorghum that are very important in marginal, famine-prone regions such as the Sahel and Horn of Africa. Root and tuber crops such as yam, sweet potato, and cassava may also begin to receive the attention they deserve.
Fig. 2.
The bottom up approach: Farmers and scientists discuss “crazy top” disease (inset) in maize caused by the downy mildew pathogenPeronosclerospora sorghi in Ogbomoso, southwestern Nigeria.
Although Africa lags far behind other regions when it comes to public information and awareness of biotechnology issues, excellent work is being done by organizations such as the Nairobi-based African Biotechnology Stakeholders Forum and South African-based AfricaBIO to educate the general public in biotechnology. Opportunities abound for scientists in Africa to get involved in these efforts that are urgently needed if Africans are going to decide for themselves what biotechnology can do for them rather than let others decide for them, especially anti-genetically modified organism activists! There is also urgency to educate policy makers in African governments and the private sector concerning the need to support and invest in biotechnology Research and Development (R&D). At the same time, the international donor community needs to begin to trust Africans and allow them to manage their research agenda for themselves. They can take the cue from very successful initiatives undertaken by the Rockefeller Foundation in Africa. There are enough African scientists around to make a difference on farmers fields if resources are properly channeled for agricultural R&D. African scientists and science managers in government and other institutions as well as farmers, on the other hand, need to be efficient and faithful in the way they manage research programs and funds if they are going to be trusted with money by national and international donors. The current success in tissue culture-aided production and multiplication of disease-free planting materials for cassava, yam, banana, plantain, citrus, and flowers in countries such as Kenya and Ghana is attracting private sector companies who are seeing the potential to invest in successful new biotechnologies.
On November 8–11, 2000, the Strategic Alliance for Biotechnology Research in African Development (SABRAD) held a workshop in Accra, Ghana, that brought together more than 150 participants from southern, East, Central, and West Africa as well as partners from the U.S. 1890 Land Grant Universities, U.S. Department of Agriculture, Food and Agricultural Organization of the United Nations, United Nations Environment Program, International Agricultural Research Centers, other non-governmental organizations, private companies, and journalists. International Agricultural Research Centers were represented by the Mexican-based International Maize and Wheat Improvement Centre and International Institute of Tropical Agriculture. The theme of this first SABRAD Workshop was “Enabling Biotechnology for African Agriculture.” Increasing education and awareness and formulation of regulatory (policy) frameworks that would allow access to modern biotechnology for R&D were identified as key priorities for enabling biotechnology for African development that targets resource-poor rural farmers. The one thing that was unique at the Accra meeting was that Africans themselves were at the center of discussions to work out plans for enabling biotechnology to take root in their respective countries. The action plans agreed upon will be implemented through networking between regions. The ultimate socio-economic impact is food self-sufficiency and improved living conditions of resource-poor farmers who were identified as the target recipients for products generated from biotechnology applications.
We live in a world that has become an increasingly interdependent “global village” due to advances in information and transportation technology. In this global village, millions have plenty of food to throw away, while millions of others die daily because they have nothing to eat. It is not always true that those with surplus food do not care about those who die in near and far away places! In Africa itself, there are many that have plenty of food, acquired either genuinely or by stealing public wealth, and who still watch their hungry neighbors die helplessly. Although Africans are thankful for development and relief aid, they are uncomfortable about their condition of continuous dependence on handouts that come in many forms, including food and expatriate foreign aid, with no permanent solutions apparently in sight. The SABRAD initiative is one step in the right direction that deserves support from all those who want to help African scientists and farmers to feed their own people.
LITERATURE CITED
For further details log on website :
http://www.plantphysiol.org/content/126/1/16.long
