A decade of Bt hype
by K P Prabhakaran Nair on 17 Apr 2012 12 Comments

In August 2002, the Genetic Engineering Approval Committee (rechristened Genetic Engineering Appraisal Committee) was manipulated by Monsanto and its Indian subsidiary Maharashtra Hybrid Seed Company, albeit through the back door, with clandestine support from vested interests in the scientific community and open support of a vocal Rajya Sabha Member. The GEAC then granted approval for the commercial cultivation of the first “Bollgard” I cotton in India, the very first genetically engineered crop in the country.


At the time I wrote an article, “Bt Cotton – Boon or Bane?” (The Hindu Business Line), which elicited spectacular enthusiasm from the reading public in India and also overseas. Sudliche Zuzammenarbeit, Berlin, a highly respected and vocal global advocacy forum, requested permission to translate the article into German and publish the same in their highly respected and well read magazine. 


At the time, I had strongly argued that the Bt cotton in India was bound to fail. A decade later, my prediction has come true. My main scientific reasoning was that the recombinant technology that was used is a technique where there is much that is not clearly understood, because it is at the very periphery of science, and results from such a technique in plant breeding is loaded with uncertainties and danger.


But half baked science, as is its wont, finds its own lobbyists for personal and pecuniary reasons. The so-called “green revolution” is another classic example in India. I had warned, even in 1980, during an international congress in Hamburg, Germany, that India’s green revolution would fall on its face. The degraded soils, dried aquifers, highly polluted ground water (loaded with so much of nitrate, making it totally non potable) and the vanishing bio-diversity due to continuous monoculture of rice-wheat with “imported” high yielding varieties (HYVs), is testimony to this.  


Add to this the cancer spread in Gurdaspur district, where uncontrolled pesticide use, an adjunct of the green revolution, has spread the disease scare like a tornado. Go to Punjab, “cradle” of India’s green revolution, or Haryana or western Uttar Pradesh, and you will understand what I mean. Sure we produced more food grains for a while, but at what environmental and human cost?


The innumerable farmers’ suicide due to unsustainable input costs leading to bankruptcy is another feather in the green revolution lobbyists’ cap!  And now the very same messiah, who in the first instance peddled this scientifically unsound strategy, is speaking of an “ever green revolution” and God knows what is meant! This is not the central theme of this article, but the Bt cotton and the Bt hype seems to have come full circle.   


Let us first see how the “science” behind Bt technology has failed. When you transpose an alien gene (in this case from a soil habiting bacterium, Bacillus thurengiensis or Bt) into a plant cell, targeting a specific pest, in this case the dreaded American Bollworm (the most devastating cotton pest), it is expected that the protein configuration which acts as a “poison” when in the gut of the sucking insect/boll worm, stays stable. But, it simply will not.  


That, in simple language, is the prime reason that while resistance to the American boll worm started faltering after three to four cotton crop seasons, other pests like the mealy bugs began to appear. And nobody ever thought of what happens to the soil in which millions of other bacteria thrive, many quite beneficial to the host plant. Without going into the intricacies of microbial science, I can say that what happens is “soil fatigue”.


This is an important reason why the so-called green revolution faltered after about a decade of its “unstoppable” spread in India. The carbon profile of Indian soils, reservoir of soil fertility, dipped so low due to indiscriminate and unbridled use of chemical fertilizers that the soils simply could not sustain crops any more. Yields declined or plateau-ed. This is also the reason why the “promoters” of Bt technology are scrambling to come out with “newer” versions of the original. So, we have “Bollgard” II, and God knows where the “development” of newer versions will stop.


We can take an analogy from automobile technology. Though the ‘internal combustion engine’ is the “basic” foundation of a four wheeler, the exterior “dressing” that the automaker keeps heaping on “newer” models, keeps customers glued to the four wheelers. Voila! There we have an automobile revolution, like the Bt cotton “revolution”. In Beijing nearly 1500 autos are added on to the roads daily. Delhi is not far behind with 1000! That is the reason we have “newer” and “newer” models every other year. We can stretch the example even to a PC (personal computer).  


As we attempt to understand the analogy better, we realize that when the “resistance” to bollworm breaks down, it will be the mealy bugs, and when that resistance also breaks down, it will be another pest. The pest gets smarter than the plant. This is the inevitable price we pay in biological science like this.


Take the case of the “miracle” dwarf varieties of wheat or rice introduced into India during the heydays of the green revolution. Where are they now? All have been wiped out. For wheat, “Brown Rust” is the most classic example.


This is the rub. And, in the process, we totally eliminate the native cotton varieties which have stood the test of time, and stood the ravages of pests and diseases, though producing less lint. In one stroke, Monsanto has succeeded in reducing vastly, if not totally eliminating, many of India’s robust native cotton varieties. India has been the loser, while Monsanto and its peddlers have been the gainers.


As of now, Bt cotton covers around 90% of the total cotton cropped area. In 2011-12, the productivity of Bt cotton is 485 kg lint per hectare. It was 560 kg lint per hectare in 2007. The danger signal has already been flashed. In other words, there is an annual reduction of more than 5% in lint yield. Will Monsanto answer please?


What we forget is that wherever yield “increase” was reported, it was under “high intensive” agriculture – ample supply of water, fertilizers, and supplemental insecticidal sprays to protect the crop against bollworm. Remove this cover, you have the crop faltering. This is the tragedy of the Vidarbha cotton farmer. Bt Cotton, when grown in rainfed areas, has miserably failed. The most telling example is from Andhra Pradesh. Of the total cotton cropped area of 47 lakh acres, in 33.73 lakh acres the crop totally failed, and remember, almost the whole area is rainfed.


Go to Vidarbha, Maharashtra’s “cotton belt”. The maximum farmers’ suicides are of cotton farmers. Why? They were financially broke after taking huge loans from unscrupulous moneylenders to prop up an unsustainable “high input technology” – exorbitantly costly seeds (when Bollgard I was introduced in India, it was sold at an unheard of price of Rs 1950 per 500 gram, while this author noted while in China the same year, Monsanto was selling the same quantity for just US $ 2, or Rs 100 at the prevalent exchange rate. This speaks volumes about the kind of financial fleecing this MNC and its Indian subsidiary have inflicted on Indian cotton farmers.


This raises an important question. Should we totally dispense with this dubious technology promoted by an alien MNC? Many ask why the Indian Council of Agricultural Research (ICAR), which has the mandate to steer India’s agricultural research, is not taking up the issue? ICAR itself embarked on a project like this, and a major scientific fraud that resulted.


It is my considered opinion that Bt technology, as of now, is just half baked science. That Bt cotton will need no more insecticidal sprays has been rubbished even in USA, the home of this dubious technology.


China is slowly but surely steering away from Bt cotton. It is not the increase in cotton yield per se that leads to widespread use. It is the promise by the MNC that farmers will no more need to protect their cotton crop with insecticidal sprays.


The larger question we, as conscientious Indians, have to ask is, should we succumb to the same lure as before, and pay a far greater price, in terms of environmental integrity in the years to come, and make Indian cotton farmers slaves to agribusiness giants, or choose other alternatives? There are quite a number available. The only roadblock is we are not intent on learning.



The author is a Kerala-based international agricultural scientist, and formerly Professor, National Science Foundation; The Royal Society, Belgium; & Senior Fellow, Alexander von Humboldt Fellow, Federal Republic of Germany
User Comments Post a Comment
Until the likes of Monsanto is made to account for the damage this deception will go on. It is time the civil society takes action.
jan
April 17, 2012
Report Abuse
I cannot argue against the Bt Cotton as Dr Prabhakaran Nair a scientist, has done. However as common sense I know that natural cotton that we have been growing since ages is the best variety, The one that we grew with chemical fertilizers was second best and that which is being grown with GM cotten seeds is the worst and costliest variety of cotton that we can have.
The seeds of this variety is needed to be purchased every season from Monsanto and balance one (from last year, if any) put to waste.We are habituated to spare some seeds from last year for better use and this facility is being snatched from our farmers, especially to benefit these chemical companies like Monsanto. Not only Monsanto does not test the seeds for defects in production, but there is a ban for customers testing the seeds also as I am told
Probably Dr Nair must have seen the advertisment - or say the news item published in Times of India sometime in middle of last year. It clearly says that the claim of Monsanto that their Bt cotton seed has been made to combat successfully the main pest 'Bullworm' of cotton while selling to Gujarat farmers was proved to be false and the fact was even accepted by Monsanto. I have a scan with me. Are our leaders bent upon distroying our agriculture? I hope not.
Mukund
April 17, 2012
Report Abuse
Also read
http://www.deccanherald.com/Content/Feb112008/editpage2008021051519.asp
Reader
April 17, 2012
Report Abuse
Another expose - THE TRUTH OF BT COTTON
http://indiatoday. intoday.in/ site/Story/ 86939/India/ Bt+cotton+ has+failed+ admits+Monsanto. htmlThe*
Kumar
April 17, 2012
Report Abuse
India was famous for textiles, including cotton. so we had good cotton
and stable practices all along. what was the need to replace it, moreover
with a dubious Bt variety?
asterix
April 17, 2012
Report Abuse
India has to wake up to these issues. It will effect everyone not just farmers since soil is polluted and need to be recovered.
RamaT
April 17, 2012
Report Abuse
When we have people inimical to national interests at the helm of affairs these things should hardly come as a surprise!
P M Ravindran
April 18, 2012
Report Abuse
Cotton farmers from Gujarat continue to obtain bumper crops and continue to plead with Delhi for permission to export.
Without green revolution, how we would have reached 300 million tons? With our traditional methods, we were forced to import wheat under PL 480 from USA.You want us to import food grains or seeds?
IC engine is a good example.If we had not imported them, we would still be driving bullock carts.Many Gandhians, Sarvodaya activists and arm chair Leftists actually want this.They should have resisted IC engines and everything else.in 1952.They instead sided with Nehru to "modernise".How do you improve farm productivity without adopting modern techniques? Our farm productivity continues to be lowest in the world and yet, we want to continue with our so called traditional wisdom.Go ahead.
Jitendra Desai
April 18, 2012
Report Abuse
http://www.envfor.nic.in/divisions/csurv/geac/srgj.pdf gives an early study conducted by the Gujarat govt. on the susceptibility of the variety of Bt-cotton to wilt. This is as early as 2002. As late as March 2012, reports were published in all newspapers that the production of cotton using Bt-modified seeds was on the downslide, even in Gujarat.

The point here is that irrespective of the tall claims by Mahyco, which works hand-in-glove with the unscrupulous Monsanto, the failure of the 'biotechnology-modified' super resistant variety of cotton is obvious. Mahyco, after all, is a family business, run by the Barwales who are beholden to the Rockefeller foundation. Considering it's headquarters are in the heart of Vidarbha, one wonders how they can sleep at night when all those cotton farmers commit suicide because of crop-failure.

The less said about ICAR, the better. Like ICMR shrugs off encephalitis deaths in Eastern UP, ICAR seems to be completely unaffected by the problems of farmers.
Vinita
April 18, 2012
Report Abuse
For the authors' information, Bt cotton is alive and well in the USA. Not only that, also in wide use are Bt.Brinjal, stay green tomato and spineless Okra etc., all results of genetic engineering.
Samukhya
April 19, 2012
Report Abuse
It was a nice article
Prem
April 20, 2012
Report Abuse
Kavitha Kuruganti, national convener, Alliance for Sustainable and Holistic Agriculture, says there is mounting evidence in the public domain, including internal advisory from the agriculture ministry, linking farm distress and suicides with Bt cotton. This is causing panic among GM promoters and their lobbies as their false hype and failed promises lie exposed.
The biotechnology industry constantly claims Bt cotton is responsible for the impressive yield growth in cotton that the country witnessed for a few years recently. Just two common-sense questions bust the myth: [1] how can Bt technology increase yields when the pest incidence itself, across crops and not just cotton, has been low over the past decade? [2] how does one explain cotton yield increases in India that have happened at an impressive rate when the same is not present in any other country that has adopted Bt cotton?
Even a lay person can say that the reasons lie not in Bt cotton, but on good old factors like large-scale shift to hybrid seed sources (only in India Bt cotton comes in hybrid seed form and not varieties). In the past decade, the area under cotton hybrids rose to 85.5 per cent of our cotton area from around 40 per cent in 2000. Uptil 2005, 100 per cent of cotton area in the north zone was under varieties; now, 95 per cent of cotton cultivated in Punjab and Haryana is with hybrid seed.
Similarly, there has been a significant shift to irrigated cotton cultivation. Sixty-five per cent of Gujarat’s cotton is irrigated today while it was only 39.5 per cent in 2000, contributing 84 per cent of the state’s cotton production, even as Gujarat is the largest cotton producer in the country. The state’s average productivity figures: in irrigated conditions, 689 kg per hectare of lint & in unirrigated conditions, mere 247 kg per hectare.
Analysis of yield also shows that impressive productivity increases in cotton happened before Bt cotton became prevalent. From 2000-01 to 2004-05, yield increased by 69 per cent. In the Bt cotton period starting 2005-06, a moderate 17 per cent increase in yield is shown over three years up to 2007-08 (554 kg per hectare compared to 470 kg per hectare). Yields show a downward trend since then.
If we look at the chemical pesticide usage, one more Bt cotton lie gets exposed. Insecticide usage in cotton (value) increased from `597 crore in 2002 to `880 crore in 2010 (data from CICR’s director). Pesticide consumption data in volume across crops from Government of India shows an increase in pesticide use in all the major cotton-growing states (Maharashtra, Madhya Pradesh, Gujarat, Karnataka) except Andhra Pradesh.
The most damning number to expose the hype around Bt cotton is related to farm suicides in a state like Maharashtra. The annual average number of suicides in the state during 1997-2002 was 2,833 and 4,067 during 2003-08 (P Sainath’s information, based on NCRB data). Clearly Bt cotton seems to have exacerbated the distress.
Behind all the hype and lies around Bt cotton, the truth is it has been a bitter harvest for Indian cotton farmers and a bonanza of prosperity for seed and pesticide companies. The story of Bt cotton once again showcases how sustainable, safer and affordable alternatives, even though they exist, do not receive the attention and investment that they deserve. Ten years after Bt cotton introduction, the government should examine the cotton crisis independently and in a nuanced manner undeterred by aggressive propaganda by seed companies. It should also step in urgently to promote alternatives like non-pesticide management that have a proven track record and direct public sector seed companies to produce high quality conventional cotton seeds to provide genuine choices for cotton farmers.
http://expressbuzz.com/voices/bt-cotton,-a-bitter-harvest-for-farmers/383821.html
Josh
April 22, 2012
Report Abuse