Rational Agriculture

According to a BBC story, Mali has a "David and Goliath GM struggle". The reason? There is a move to consider introducing Bt cotton varieties, which would resist pests and require less spraying. That sounds quite sensible, to evaluate available technology and decide whether or not to use it. Siaka Dembele, of the country's agricultural research institute (the IER), says that they have seen figures showing that improved yields are possible, and are now embarking on a 5-year study, together with USAid, Monsanto and Syngenta to see whether this could be beneficial for Mali.

But some people are trying to stop this. According to the article:

"That's an absurd proposition," says Asseto Samake, a professor of genetics and biology at the University of Mali. "The claims they are making for this cotton are absolutely false."

"Our farmers in West Africa achieve record production using just their digging sticks and regular seeds and they have great difficulty selling what they produce, because subsidies in America and Europe have made the world price for cotton fall.

"So why do they come now with their GMOs and technology to solve a problem that they created? It's a big farce!" adds Ms Samake, who is a member of the Coalition to Protect Mali's Genetic Heritage that formed when word leaked from IER about the USAid-funded project on BT crops.

Hidden in the knee-jerk anti-GM reaction is some truth: agricultural subsidies do distort the market, and do disadvantage farmers in Mali and elsewhere. But this has nothing to do with GM or any other agricultural technology. The "Coalition to Protect Mali's Genetic Heritage" is another environmentalist, anti-globalisation front, led by people with strong beliefs and closed minds. They cleverly represent themselves as David in the struggle against the American Goliath.

Perhaps Bt cotton won't work in Mali. But, if there's money available for the project and local scientists and farmers want to do the evaluation, why should anyone want to stop them?