Orissa Villages Declared GM Contamination Free
Forum for Biotechnology & Food Security
G-3F, DDA Flats, Munirka, New Delhi-110 067
Tel: 9811301857; 9811191335
1,727 villages in Orissa declared GM free :
Seven hundred newly elected representatives of Panchayats in Orissa and the Governing Body members of Orissa Nari Samaj - a confederation of 53 block-level tribal women’s organizations - resolved to protect nature, promote biodiversity, and also took an oath NOT to cultivate Genetically Modified (GM) crops.
The elected representatives declared 1,727 villages falling under 130 Panchayats in 12 districts as GM Free villages. These villages are in the districts of Koraput,, Rayagada, Malkangiri, Nawarangpur, Kalahandi, Bargarh, Bolangir, Deogarh, Jharsuguda, Sambalpur, Sundargarh, Mayurbhanj in Orissa.
This brings the total number of villages in the country, which have decided to remain GM free, close to 1,900. These GM Free villages are located in Orissa, Uttar Pradesh, Andhra Pradesh and Tamil Nadu.
The oath in Orissa was taken at a conference organized by the Team for Human Resource Education and Action for Development (THREAD) on “Model Panchayats in Orissa” at Siddharth village, Khurda, near Bhubaneshwar on Mar 20. The State Election Commissioner, Shri Sanjib Chandra Hota was the chief guest at the conference and the Regional Coordinator of Institute for Social Studies Mr. K.K Pattnaik delivered the keynote address.
Speaking on the occasion, Mr G. John, Executive Director of ‘Team for Human Resource Education and Action for Development’ (THREAD) informed that the Panchayat leaders have also sent memorandums to the Prime Minister of India and the state Chief Minister stating clearly that they will not cooperate with any activities of either the National Biodiversity Authority or the State Biodiversity Board unless control over local biodiversity and related knowledge is passed on to the communities. Demanding protection of local knowledge against piracy, they insisted that people’s access to natural resources should be given priority over commercial trade.
The leaders expressed hope that their action will be emulated by other villages, which will force Orissa to turn into a GM-free state. They resolved to work towards community control over biodiversity, to preserve and protect biodiversity for the sake of food sovereignty. These leaders have already launched a movement against GM seeds in the tribal belt.
Orissa Nari Samaj had continuously been opposed to the entry of GM crop seeds since 2005. Decrying the seed company’s agenda to lay siege to poor farmer’s livelihood, it had earlier sent thousands of letters from 2,500 villages in 53 blocks to the Chief Minister and the Chairman of the Genetic Engineering Approval Committee (GEAC) against the large scale field trials of Bt Brinjal. In its endeavour to make the people of the state aware of the hazards of GM crops as well as the advantages of organic food, THREAD has so far printed and distributed about 40,000 posters throughout the state stating the same.
Attached photograph: 700 elected Panchayat leaders and members of the Orissa Nari Samaj (ONS) taking oath for establishing model GM free Panchayats. These panchayats represent 1,727 villages in 12 districts of Orissa
********************************
Bhaskar Goswami
Forum for Biotechnology & Food Security
New Delhi, India
Mob: +91-98111-91335
Skype: b.goswami
Showing posts with label villages. Show all posts
Showing posts with label villages. Show all posts
Friday, March 30, 2007
Monday, February 19, 2007
GM Contamination Free Foods
"Decision-making on GE crops should be democratized"
Debates form the cornerstone for democratizing technology,decision-making and policy formulation in the country.
Very often, the primary stakeholders of such technologies are not informed fully on various nuances and details of the technology being thrust upen them in a top-down decision-making model. Much decision-making is often driven by funding rather than scientific facts and long term vision for the agriculture of this country. Genetic Engineering (GE) in agriculture is one such technology which will directly affect millions of farmers in the country and all of us as consumers of food.
This is something which people should engage themselves on and be clear about acceptance or rejection and the reasons thereof.
Genetic engineering in cultivation is permitted by only 21 countries around the world, despite the introduction of the technology on a commercial basis more than a decade ago in the USA.
Around 70% of the area cultivated with GE crops is in just the USA and Argentina. That speaks volumes about the acceptance and adoption of this so-called "frontier technology".
More and more countries, provinces andcommunities are declaring themselves GE-Free and several suchdecisions have been taken after understanding / experiencing the technology and its ramifications.
Unlike other hazardous technologies like chemical pesticides, Genetic Engineering in agriculture is an irreversible process, once released into the open environment, since the technology involves the modification of living organisms whichreproduce, contaminate, spread, impact eco-systems and so on.
There is growing evidence of the potential environmental and health hazards associated with this technology from across the world. There are fundamental questions unanswered on the very science of GE and its unpredictability and imprecision.
This is true in India too, where the only commercially cultivated GMcrop is Bt Cotton – here, even official reports now indicate that there are changes being witnessed on a large scale in cotton farm ecology.
There are newer pests and diseases emerging as major problems for the cotton farmers each year. The claims of higher yields and better economics have been proven wrong over the past five years for many Bt Cotton farmers, despite claims to the contrary by theindustry.
There is much hype that has been created around the many benefits that are supposed to have accrued to farmers who have adopted the technology. Much of such data has been generated with the industry's funding and unfortunately, the regulators have not made any efforts for systematic and scientific monitoring on the ground. Serious and unacceptable regulatory failures have been compounding the situation related to GE crop development and introduction in India.
In recent times, major farmers' groups, traders and even political parties have stated their rejection of the notion of GE technology being a solution to problems in Indian farming and the deep agrarian crisis being witnessed all around today.
Elsewhere in countries like the UK, Netherlands, Norway, Germany etc., decisions related to such technologies in general and GE in particular, are guided by deliberative democratic processes like citizens' juries, 'consensus conferences', referendums etc. and India has much to learn from such processes in relation to S & T policy making in this country.
- With thanks to Samanvaya, Sumitra. - Press release from Kavitha Kuruganti
Debates form the cornerstone for democratizing technology,decision-making and policy formulation in the country.
Very often, the primary stakeholders of such technologies are not informed fully on various nuances and details of the technology being thrust upen them in a top-down decision-making model. Much decision-making is often driven by funding rather than scientific facts and long term vision for the agriculture of this country. Genetic Engineering (GE) in agriculture is one such technology which will directly affect millions of farmers in the country and all of us as consumers of food.
This is something which people should engage themselves on and be clear about acceptance or rejection and the reasons thereof.
Genetic engineering in cultivation is permitted by only 21 countries around the world, despite the introduction of the technology on a commercial basis more than a decade ago in the USA.
Around 70% of the area cultivated with GE crops is in just the USA and Argentina. That speaks volumes about the acceptance and adoption of this so-called "frontier technology".
More and more countries, provinces andcommunities are declaring themselves GE-Free and several suchdecisions have been taken after understanding / experiencing the technology and its ramifications.
Unlike other hazardous technologies like chemical pesticides, Genetic Engineering in agriculture is an irreversible process, once released into the open environment, since the technology involves the modification of living organisms whichreproduce, contaminate, spread, impact eco-systems and so on.
There is growing evidence of the potential environmental and health hazards associated with this technology from across the world. There are fundamental questions unanswered on the very science of GE and its unpredictability and imprecision.
This is true in India too, where the only commercially cultivated GMcrop is Bt Cotton – here, even official reports now indicate that there are changes being witnessed on a large scale in cotton farm ecology.
There are newer pests and diseases emerging as major problems for the cotton farmers each year. The claims of higher yields and better economics have been proven wrong over the past five years for many Bt Cotton farmers, despite claims to the contrary by theindustry.
There is much hype that has been created around the many benefits that are supposed to have accrued to farmers who have adopted the technology. Much of such data has been generated with the industry's funding and unfortunately, the regulators have not made any efforts for systematic and scientific monitoring on the ground. Serious and unacceptable regulatory failures have been compounding the situation related to GE crop development and introduction in India.
In recent times, major farmers' groups, traders and even political parties have stated their rejection of the notion of GE technology being a solution to problems in Indian farming and the deep agrarian crisis being witnessed all around today.
Elsewhere in countries like the UK, Netherlands, Norway, Germany etc., decisions related to such technologies in general and GE in particular, are guided by deliberative democratic processes like citizens' juries, 'consensus conferences', referendums etc. and India has much to learn from such processes in relation to S & T policy making in this country.
- With thanks to Samanvaya, Sumitra. - Press release from Kavitha Kuruganti
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)