WHAT IS MORE LIKELY TO SUCCEED LONG TERM … Pathways Project 2012... · WHAT IS MORE LIKELY TO SUCCEED LONG-TERM: ORGANIC OR GENETICALLY-MODIFIED FRESH ... organic or genetically-modified

1

Michael French – [email protected]

WHAT IS MORE LIKELY TO SUCCEED LONG-TERM: ORGANIC OR

GENETICALLY-MODIFIED FRESH PRODUCE?

A REPORT CARRIED OUT AS PART OF THE 2012 PMA FRESH CONNECTIONS CAREER

PATHWAYS PROGRAM

MICHAEL FRENCH

MASSEY UNIVERSITY

NEW ZEALAND

JULY 2012

2


EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Growing world population levels are set to define the future of fresh produce. Production systems

will be shaped by producers abilities to maximize yields from limited agricultural land areas, whilst

minimizing inputs, to maintain sustainable growing systems.

Organic production involves producing food with minimal inputs of chemicals or fertilizer, utilizing

natural agricultural techniques which promote ecological health and sustainability. Currently

organically produced food accounts for around 1% of global food sales, and is worth over AU$ 1

billion to the Australian economy.

Genetically modified production involves utilizing organisms which have been genetically modified in

agriculture. Genetic modification (GM) allows traits such as pest resistance, herbicide tolerance or

improved nutritional/ health qualities to be inserted into crops, bypassing conventional breeding.

GM technology has been shown to have significant advantages in terms of yield per unit area over

organic production systems. GM crops can also offer significant health benefits, and can be

implanted with nutrients to combat deficiency in the developing world.

IFOAM, the International Federation for Organic Agricultural Movements, presents an argument that

the future of agriculture lies in converting the world to organic production. Their argument is based

around their perception that organic production systems do not damage the environment, and so

can be carried out indefinitely. IFOAM also believe that their produce has greater health benefits

than that produced by GM or conventional agriculture.

Monsanto are representative of the major producers of GM crops. They believe that by breeding

crop varieties to better tolerate water shortages, pests and diseases, and deliver better nutrition,

many of the issues facing food, and fresh produce production can be resolved.

There are both positive and negative consumer perceptions of both the organic and GM sectors.

Many people do not see a direct benefit to organics, or are unwilling to pay a premium, which limits

its market share. GM crops have negative public perception also, due mainly to a fear of the

unknown, along with other philosophical arguments against the technology.

The findings of this report lead to the conclusion that production systems incorporating GM would

be most likely to succeed long-term. These production systems would however use GM crops as one

of many tools enabling maximum yields of fresh produce, whilst minimizing environmental impacts

through GM and technological improvements, and drawing agricultural ‘best practices’ from many

sectors, including organics, to create a robust production system.

3


CONTENTS What is more likely to succeed long-term: organic or genetically-modified fresh produce? ............................. 1

A report carried out as part of the 2012 PMA Fresh Connections Career Pathways program .......................... 1

Michael French ............................................................................................................................................... 1

Massey University .......................................................................................................................................... 1

New Zealand .................................................................................................................................................. 1

July 2012 ........................................................................................................................................................ 1

Executive Summary ............................................................................................................................................ 2

Introduction: ...................................................................................................................................................... 4

Background ........................................................................................................................................................ 4

Organic agriculture defined: ........................................................................................................................... 4

Current Status of Organic food production: .................................................................................................... 5

Genetically Modified Production defined: ...................................................................................................... 6

Current Status of Genetically Modified food production: ............................................................................... 6

Discussion: ......................................................................................................................................................... 7

Are Organics the answer? IFOAM’s Argument: ............................................................................................... 8

Is Genetic Modification the future? Monsanto’s Argument: ........................................................................... 9

Consumer Perception of Organic vs. Genetically Modified foods: ................................................................... 9

Are there similarities between Organics and GM? ........................................................................................ 10

Conclusion ........................................................................................................................................................ 11

Bibliography ..................................................................................................................................................... 12

4


INTRODUCTION:

With the world population having passed 7 billion people in 2011, and set to reach 9 billion by 2050,

there a there will be inevitable changes in the demographics of food production worldwide. This

change will have a profound effect on fresh produce production systems. In our changing world, long

term success for any food production system will require an ability to produce sustainably, yet utilise

land area and resources efficiently enough to feed the world’s population. This report will

investigate two differing production systems, organics and genetically modified (GM) production,

and determine which has a greater chance of long term success in the fresh produce industry.

BACKGROUND

The world’s human population was estimated to have reached 7 billion as of the 31st of October

2011, and continues to rise. In 2010 it was estimated that 925 million people around the world

suffer from some degree of malnutrition (Food and Agriculture Organisation of the United Nations,

2011). At current population levels we already have serious issues in supplying the world with

enough fresh produce. The United Nations 2004 ‘World Population to 2300’ report indicated that

populations could reach between 7.4 and 10.6 billion by 2050, with 9.1 billion being the median

prediction, based on current demographic trends. The world will require more food than ever

before, which will put huge demand on the skills and resources of producers of fresh fruit and

vegetables.

This requirement for food presents a significant issue- what is the best method of producing food for

this growing population? Traditionally there are two opposing views on how this can be achieved:

1. Produce food as sustainably as possible through ‘Organic’ production.

2. Use ‘Genetically Modified’ plants and animals to produce food as efficiently as possible,

maximising production.

ORGANIC AGRICULTURE DEFINED:

5


The following statement was released by IFOAM, the International Federation for Organic

Agricultural Movements, in 2005, as attempt to define ‘organic agriculture.’

“Organic agriculture is a production system that sustains the health of soils, ecosystems and

people. It relies on ecological processes, biodiversity and cycles adapted to local conditions, rather

than the use of inputs with adverse effects. Organic agriculture combines tradition, innovation and

science to benefit the shared environment and promote fair relationships and a good quality of life

for all involved.” (International Federation for Organic Agriculture Movements, 2009).

This statement is formed around a set of four principals relating to health, ecology, fairness and care

as set out by IFOAM. The statement gives a base of ideas regulating the organic production of fresh

fruit and vegetables.

In the fresh produce sector, any organic product must be produced in a system which is certified as

organic (the rules differ in relation to processed products). In Australia, companies such as AusQual

are able to certify a grower’s production system as meeting a set standard, defined as the “National

Standard for Organic and Bio-Dynamic Produce”. (AusQual, 2011). Similar certification programmes

exist worldwide, such as AsureQuality in New Zealand, and set varying degrees of compliance

standards for producers. Therefore the true nature of an organic product can be defined in relation

to the certification scheme under which it is produced. An apple produced under the JAS system for

export to Japan may have significantly differing production methods employed to that produced in

compliance with Canada’s COR scheme (BioGro, 2011).

CURRENT STATUS OF ORGANIC FOOD PRODUCTION:

Currently the global organic food market is estimated to be worth over US$60billion annually, and is

forecast to reach US$88billion by 2015 (DataMonitor, 2010). The Australian organic industry as of

2010 was worth AU$947 million (up from $623 million in 2008) (Kristensen, 2010). This growth was

estimated to exceed AU$1 billion in 2011. Backed by growing concerns over food ethics in the

developed world, this production sector should continue to see steady growth. Organic production

exists across almost all fresh produce sectors, generally filling a niche market sector, with organic

vegetable production occupying around 1% of total sales, and organic fruit 0.08% (by gross sales)

(Kristensen, 2010).

6


GENETICALLY MODIFIED PRODUCTION DEFINED:

Genetic Modification is defined as “the use of modern biotechnology techniques to change the

genes of an organism, such as a plant or animal” (CSIRO , 2007). Gene insertion techniques are used

to develop new organisms which possess desirable traits, by taking a section of gene and implanting

it into the DNA of the organism to be modified. Without this technology, conventional breeding,

which relies on natural variations, is required to breed for these traits. Current GM crops are

primarily modified for increased yields through either lowered pesticide requirements, or increased

tolerance to herbicides (allowing greater control over weeds) (World Health Organisation, 2001).

CURRENT STATUS OF GENETICALLY MODIFIED FOOD PRODUCTION:

Genetically modified food consumption is harder to measure. GM is not marketed directly to the

consumer, it is marketed to the producer. Within fresh produce, papaya, plums, capsicums,

tomatoes, corn and many other species have all been modified to improve their agricultural

performance. While not strictly fresh produce, corn, soybean and cotton are some of the major

crops currently produced primarily using GM varieties.

Adoption of GM crops in the US (United States Department of Agriculture, 2012)

7


Since 1996, global production of GM crops has grown from 1.7million hectares to 160million

hectares in 2011. Figure 1, above, shows the proportions of herbicide-tolerant (HT), and insect

resistance due to the bacterium Bacillus thuringiensis (Bt) corn, cotton and soybeans grown in the

US today. Taking all GM into account, 94% the planted area of cotton, 93% of soybeans and 88% of

corn grown in the US has some form of genetic modification

Currently, commercial scale GM production is limited to grain crops, soy and cotton. However the

technology is readily available to utilise the benefits of GM crops in fresh produce, and there are

now some examples of fresh produce utilizing the technology. GM corn is the most widespread fresh

GM vegetable sold worldwide. Transgenic Papaya has been developed in response to viral infection,

and has effectively saved the Hawaiian Papaya industry (Davidson, 2008). Australian scientists have

recently developed a GM banana which is dense in nutrients, and especially in iron, in response to

widespread anaemia in India and other parts of the developing world (Herbert, 2012). Similar

technology has also been utilised in the development of ‘Golden Rice’ - a rice variety which produces

beta-carotene, a compound which produces Vitamin A in the body. This is important as an estimated

40% of children in the developing world have some form of vitamin A deficiency, and many of these

are reliant upon a rice- based diet. Technology of this nature, along with pest, disease and herbicides

resistance, have a huge potential to bring fresh produce into the future.

DISCUSSION:

Given the current world population dynamics, along with global shortages of water, oil and

productive land area, it is clear that to succeed long-term, a food production system must use all

resources as efficiently as possible, and maximise yields per land area unit. Genetically modified

fresh produce has the potential to succeed long term- GM technology has the advantage of being

able to produce higher yields per unit of water, land, pesticide etc for a given crop, compared with

organic production. For example, European Corn Borer is estimated to cause in excess of US$ 1

billion in damage to corn production system in North America each year (Ostlie, 2002). This pest has

been combated through inserting a gene into corn giving a natural resistance to the pest, leading to

around 99% control of the first larval generation. Traditional/ organic control, utilising both natural

predators and insecticides, can only achieve 60-95% control on 1st generation larvae, and 40-80% on

second generation larvae- leading to significant yield reductions.

8


Furthermore, genetic modification of fresh fruits and vegetables can add to their nutritional

potential, which has benefits for dealing with growing levels of nutrient deficiency within the

developing world. People are growing in awareness to the negative consequences their food choices

are having on the long term viability of food production on earth. The fundamental concepts behind

organic production are seen to offer answers to this issue- by producing food in ways without

adverse impacts on the earth or human health, allowing for continued production into the future.

ARE ORGANICS THE ANSWER? IFOAM’S ARGUMENT:

IFOAM, the International Federation for Organic Agricultural Movements, presents an argument that

the future of agriculture lies in converting the world to organic production. This is based on several

factors, the most prevalent being the perceived environmental and human health benefits

Environmental Benefits:

IFOAM believes that organic agriculture has significant advantages over conventional or GM

agriculture in terms of environmental sustainability (IFOAM, 2009). This is achieved through using

natural controls for pests and diseases, which lowers the need for conventional sprays, and has

benefits for soil health and the biotic environment. This allows land to be cropped indefinitely.

IFOAM also argues that organic production methods produce less carbon dioxide and greenhouse

gasses, which lower its effects on global climate change.

Human Health:

From the definition of Organic agriculture comes this statement: “Organically-grown fruits and

vegetables obtain their nutrients from healthy soils, rather than synthetic fertilizers. They are lower

in water content, thus reserving a higher nutrient density, they are richer in iron, magnesium,

vitamin C, and antioxidants, and they provide a more balanced combination of essential amino

acids.” (IFOAM, 2009) IFOAM believes that this more natural method of producing fruits and

vegetables has benefits for human health, and so is a better alternative to conventional or GM

crops. IFOAM also argue that the issues relating to food supply are not caused by inadequate food

supply, but are more closely related to problems distributing food from where it is produced to

where it is required.

9


IS GENETIC MODIFICATION THE FUTURE? MONSANTO’S ARGUMENT:

Monsanto are a major producer of GM crops, and a leader in their field, so serve as a good

representative of their industry. Monsanto believe strongly that the future of agriculture will be

defined by the worlds growing population (Monsanto, 2010). Feeding this growing population will

require at least one of two things- increasing agricultural land area, or increasing the productivity of

our current land. Genetic modification is just one tool that Monsanto believes can make current land

resources significantly more productive. Varieties can be bred to better tolerate water shortages,

pests and diseases, and deliver better nutrition, whilst input per unit of yield is decreased. Traits

which better utilise nutrient applications can also be added, along with faster maturing varieties, and

improved postharvest handling traits. Combined with best practices coming from organic and

conventional farming techniques, such as ‘no till’ and utilisation of technology across production

systems, Monsanto believes GM technology has a huge potential to increase global food supply. In

summary, Monsanto believes that their technology can lead to increased production of nutrient

dense food, whilst reducing the amount of inputs of land, water, energy and chemicals/fertilisers

required.

Currently Monsanto is working to double the yields that their core crops- corn, soy, cotton and

spring planted canola produce, between 2000 and 2030. This is a direct response to the issue of food

shortages/ global food security. This will be done through breeding, biotechnology (GM) and ‘best

practice’ farm management.

CONSUMER PERCEPTION OF ORGANIC VS. GENETICALLY MODIFIED FOODS:

Organic and GM foods occupy very different spaces. Organic foods generally have 3 perceptions.

There are the ‘die-hard’ organic supporters, who buy organic foods regardless of price due to

philosophical beliefs. Then there are those who believe there are benefits to be had with organics,

and will buy if the price is right, as an impulse purchase rather than a pre-meditated choice. The

third group are the pragmatics- who for reasons such as not seeing a benefit with organic foods,

cannot afford to pay premiums, have negative conceptions of organic foods, or for any reason will

not buy organic produce. It is estimated that 95% of organic food sales occur in the US or EU

(Anderson, 2006). These countries represent developed nations, and organic food consumers

generally represent the middle- upper class who have the income necessary to support an organic

10


choice, often supplied as niche market options. In developing countries where food choice is limited,

there is little market for organic produce.

Whereas organic foods are produced to meet consumer demands, which stem from health or ethical

reasoning for organic production methods, GM crops are produced for very different reasons. As

indicated in the background discussion, reasons for genetic modification are generally related to

yield improvements in some form, although there is a growing trend of using GM to incorporate

vitamins and nutrients into fresh produce for consumer benefit (and grain crops). ‘Genetic

Modification’ and ‘Genetic Engineering’ have long held a negative consumer perception. The reasons

for this are varied, and cannot be easily defined. People fear the unknown, and GM does have a

significant unknown factor. However it is not too far removed from the concept of traditional

breeding, where DNA combinations will always be different, leading to natural mutations which have

naturally driven evolution for millions of years. There are fears that GM foods are not healthy- the

‘Frankenstein’ food perception, and that somehow inserted genes can be passed on to humans

through ingestion. Again this is untrue, but consumer perception is key in getting a product

accepted. The media may have played a large part in this, promoting these fears and negative

images.

ARE THERE SIMILARITIES BETWEEN ORGANICS AND GM?

At face value, the concepts of organics and GM are often considered very different, even opposing in

nature. Organics is focused on a production system which is deemed as natural as possible, to

maintain sustainability, whereas GM looks to modify natural factors in order to improve efficiency

and yields. The concept of GM alone is generally enough to stop organic fundamentalists from

considering GM as a part of their system. However on closer inspection there are similarities in what

the two sciences are trying to achieve. Both systems are aiming to reduce reliance on inorganic

fertilisers, pesticides, fungicides etc. Both look to use water as efficiently as possible. GM technology

is often primarily in place to maximise yield, hence making best use of available land area, and

organic producers also want to maximise yield (although this is less of a focus). The following extract

is taken from IFOAM’s definition of organics: “Organic agriculture combines tradition, innovation and

science to benefit the shared environment and promote fair relationships and a good quality of life

for all involved.” (International Federation for Organic Agriculture Movements, 2009). The fact that

organic agriculture does look to combine science and innovation into their production methods

11


suggests that organics and GM are not as far removed from one another than popular perception

indicates. Organics has chosen to take a stance which does not support GM crops, for philosophical

reasons and perceived, unsubstantiated health hazards, so refuse to incorporate this technology into

their production systems, which is the key reason that organics and GM cannot currently work in

unison.

CONCLUSION

The future is set to see a change in the dynamics of global food production. With an unprecedented

demand on land, water and energy resources, the way in which we produce food will see drastic

changes in order to keep up with global requirements for food. Organic systems, whilst having

significant advantages in that they can produce food in a manner which is more sustainable than

conventional agriculture, will not be able to compete with higher yielding fresh produce varieties, as

are being created through genetic modification technology. The land area: productivity equation will

be the governing factor which determines which crops are grown where in a world of 9 billion

humans.

In practice, if organic farming is unable to take on GM crops, it will probably not move past the 1%

market share it currently holds, in fact this share will most likely decline. The steps companies such

as Monsanto are taking to move agricultural production systems forward will be far more likely to

succeed. By utilising GM technology alongside agricultural best practice drawn from all areas of

production (e.g., conventional or GM), these companies give themselves the best chance at

developing systems that can not only feed the world, but also deliver nutrients, minimise inputs, and

move towards a sustainable future. In conclusion, genetically modified fresh produce is far more

likely to prevail in the future than organics.

12


BIBLIOGRAPHY Anderson, J. W. (2006). Perceptions of Genetically Modified and Organic Foods and Processes. AgBioForum ,

180-194.

AusQual. (2011). Organics. Retrieved July 25, 2012, from AusQual: http://www.ausqual.com.au/certification-

services/organics.aspx

CSIRO . (2007, Novemeber 2). What is Genetic Modification (GM) . Retrieved 7 2, 2012, from CSIRO:

http://www.csiro.au/Outcomes/Food-and-Agriculture/WhatIsGM.aspx

DataMonitor. (2010). Global Food Industry Guide. DataMonitor.

Davidson, S. (2008). Forbidden fruit, transgenic Papaya in Thailand. Plant Physiology , 487-493.

Food and Agriculture Organisation of the United Nations. (2011). The State of Food Insecurity in the world

2011. Rome: FAO.

Herbert, B. (2012, March 10). India goes bananas for GM fruit. Retrieved July 26, 2012, from ABC News:

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2012-03-09/aussie-scientists-provide-india-with-iron-rich-bananas/3880672

IFOAM. (2009). Growing Organic. Retrieved July 25, 2012, from IFOAM:

http://www.ifoam.org/growing_organic/1_arguments_for_oa/environmental_benefits/environmental_benefi

ts_main_page.html

International Federation for Organic Agriculture Movements. (2009). Principals of Organic Agriculture.

Retrieved 7 2, 2012, from IFOAM: http://www.ifoam.org/about_ifoam/principles/index.html

Kristensen, P. M. (2010). Australian Organic Market Report 2010. Biological Farmers of Australia.

Monsanto. (2010). United in Growth. Missouri: Monsanto.

Ostlie, T. (2002). Bt Corn and European Corn Borer. Minnesota: University of Minnesota.

United Nations- Economic and Social Affairs. (2004). World Population to 2300. New York: United Nations.

United States Census Bureau . (2012, May 31). US and World Population Clocks. Retrieved July 1, 2012, from

census.gov: http://www.census.gov/main/www/popclock.html

United States Department of Agriculture. (2012, July 05). Recent Trends in GE adoption. Retrieved July 25,

2012, from US Department of Agriculture: http://www.ers.usda.gov/data-products/adoption-of-genetically-

engineered-crops-in-the-us/recent-trends-in-ge-adoption.aspx

World Health Organisation. (2001). Safety assesment of foods derived from genetically modifed organisms. .

WHO.

13


Documents

WHAT IS MORE LIKELY TO SUCCEED LONG TERM … Pathways Project 2012... · WHAT IS MORE LIKELY TO SUCCEED LONG-TERM: ORGANIC OR GENETICALLY-MODIFIED FRESH ... organic or genetically-modified