Subscribe to Common Dreams News Updates
Most Popular This Week
Popular content
Today's Top News
Corporations Grab Climate Genes
First the biotech industry promised that its genetically engineered seeds would clean up the environment. Then they told us biotech crops would feed the world. Neither came to pass. Soon we'll hear that genetically engineered climate-hardy seeds are the essential adaptation strategy for crops to withstand drought, heat, cold, saline soils and more. After failing to convince an unwilling public to accept genetically engineered foods, biotech companies see a silver lining in climate change. They are now asserting that farmers cannot win the war against climate change without genetic engineering. According to a new report from ETC Group, the world's largest seed and agrochemical corporations such as Monsanto, BASF, DuPont, Syngenta, Bayer, and Dow -- along with biotech partners such as Mendel, Ceres, and Evogene -- are stockpiling hundreds of patents and patent applications on crop genes related to environmental stress tolerance at patent offices around the world. They have acquired a total of 55 patent families corresponding to 532 patents and patent applications.
In the face of climate chaos and a deepening world food crisis, the Gene Giants are gearing up for a PR offensive to re-brand themselves as climate saviors. The companies hope to convince governments and reluctant consumers that genetic engineering is the essential adaptation strategy to insure agricultural productivity. In the words of Keith Jones of CropLife International, an industry-supported non-profit organization, "GM foods are exactly the technology that may be necessary to counter the effects of global warming." But rather than an effective way to confront climate change, these so-called "climate-ready" crops will be used to drive farmers and governments onto a proprietary biotech platform.
Climate Change and Food Crisis
Human-induced climate change is triggering climate shocks in all ecosystems. It will profoundly affect crops, livestock, fisheries and forests and the billions of people whose livelihoods depend on them. Agriculture and food systems in the South, especially in South Asia and southern Africa, will be the first and most negatively affected. Extreme climate events (especially hotter, drier conditions in semi-arid regions) are likely to slash yields for maize, wheat, rice, and other primary food crops.
For instance, Asian rice yields will decrease dramatically due to higher night-time temperatures. With warmer conditions, photosynthesis slows or ceases, pollination is prevented, and dehydration sets in. A study by the International Rice Research Institute reports that rice yields are declining by 10% for every degree Celsius increase in night-time temperatures. South Asia's prime wheat-growing land -- the vast Indo-Gangetic plain that produces about 15% of the world's wheat crop -- will shrink 51% by 2050 due to hotter, drier weather and diminished yields, a loss that will place at least 200 million people at greater risk of hunger.
For the world's largest agrochemical and seed corporations, genetic engineering is the technofix of choice for combating climate change. It is a proprietary approach that seeks to expand an industrial model of agriculture -- one which is largely divorced from on-the-ground social and environmental realities. (It is also an approach that fails to learn from history. Many of the problems with saline soils and soil degradation, for example, have been exacerbated by the use of intensive production systems.) The Gene Giants are now focusing on the identification and patenting of climate-proof genetic traits (genes associated with abiotic stresses), especially related to drought and extreme temperatures. "Abiotic" stresses refer to environmental stresses encountered by plants such as drought, temperature extremes, saline soils, low nitrogen, etc.
The Game of Monopoly
Monopoly control of crop genes is a bad idea under any circumstances. But in the midst of a global food crisis with climate change looming, such control is unacceptable and must be challenged. Patented gene technologies will concentrate corporate power, drive up costs, inhibit independent research, and further undermine the rights of farmers to save and exchange seeds. Globally, the top 10 seed corporations already control 57% of commercial seed sales. A handful of transnational seed and agrochemical companies are positioned to determine who gets access to patented genes and what price they must pay.
Many of these patent claims are unprecedented in scope because a single patent may claim several different environmental -- or abiotic -- stress traits. In addition, some patent claims extend not just to abiotic stress tolerance in a single engineered plant species -- but also to a substantially similar genetic sequence in virtually all engineered food crops. The corporate grab extends beyond the United States and Europe. Patent offices in major food producing countries such as Argentina, Australia, Brazil, Canada, China, Mexico, and South Africa are also swamped with patent filings. Monsanto (the world's largest seed company) and BASF (the world's largest chemical firm) have entered into a colossal $1.5 billion partnership to engineer stress-tolerant plants. Together the two companies account for nearly half of the patent families related to engineered stress tolerance.
Farming communities in the developing world -- those who have contributed least to global greenhouse emissions -- are among the most threatened by climate chaos created by the world's richest countries. Will farming communities now be stampeded by climate profiteering? The focus on genetically engineered, so-called 'climate-ready' crops will divert resources from affordable, farmer-based strategies for climate change survival and adaptation.
Misguided Philanthropy
In a bid to win moral legitimacy for their controversial GM seeds, the Gene Giants are also teaming up with philanthro-capitalists to introduce climate-tolerant traits in the developing world. Monsanto and BASF, for instance, are working with the International Maize and Wheat Improvement Center (CIMMYT) and national agricultural research programs in Kenya, Uganda, Tanzania, and South Africa to develop drought-tolerant corn. The program is supported by a $47 million grant from the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation. In March 2008 the African Agricultural Technology Foundation announced that Monsanto and BASF have agreed to donate royalty-free drought-tolerant transgenes to the African researchers.
Market-based philanthropy aims to open African markets for high-tech seeds that will undoubtedly be accompanied by intellectual property laws, seed regulations, and other products and practices amenable to agribusiness. To African farmers, this is hardly philanthropic.
As the climate crisis deepens, governments may well offer corporate subsidies by encouraging farmers to adopt prescribed biotech traits that are deemed essential adaptation measures. The U.S. government's Federal Crop Insurance Company announced in October 2007 that it would begin a pilot program that offers a discount to farmers who plant Monsanto's "triple-stack" corn seeds on non-irrigated land -- reportedly because the biotech corn (engineered for herbicide tolerance and two kinds of insect resistance) provides a lower risk of reduced yields when compared to conventional hybrids. The decision was especially controversial because USDA relied on Monsanto's data to substantiate this claim.
Staying the Corporate Hand
In the face of climate chaos and a deepening global food crisis, the corporate grab on so-called climate-tolerant genes is business as usual. Governments must respond urgently by:
- Recognizing, protecting, and strengthening farmer-based breeding and conservation programs and the development of on-farm genetic diversity as a priority response for climate change survival and adaptation;
- Suspending all patents on climate-related genes and traits and conducting a full investigation of the potential environmental and social impacts of transgenic abiotic stress-tolerant seeds;
- Adopting policies to facilitate farmers' access to and exchange of breeding materials and eliminate current restrictions on access to seeds and germplasm (especially those driven by intellectual property, agribusiness-inspired seed laws, trade regimes, and corporate oligopoly). In the midst of climate crisis, spiraling food prices and food scarcity, restrictions on access to seeds and germplasm are the last thing that farmers need in their struggle to adapt to rapidly changing climatic conditions.
Genetically engineered "climate-tolerant" seeds are a technological fix that distracts from the root causes of climate change and the imperative to cut greenhouse gas emissions and reverse consumption patterns -- especially in the North.
Hope Shand is the research director of the ETC Group and a contributor to Foreign Policy In Focus.



16 Comments so far
Show AllWe need Dr. Suess now to update "The Lorax".
"Genetically engineered "climate-tolerant" seeds are a technological fix that distracts from the root causes of climate change and the imperative to cut greenhouse gas emissions and reverse consumption patterns — especially in the North."
"Distraction" or not, climate change is a reality and there is no way, given the fact that the large polluters are not doing what is needed to reverse global warming (U.S., China, Europe, India, just for starters), genetically modified crops that can handle the new conditions may be our only hope for feeding humanity. But take away the corporations' patents by all means. Do not allow them to impoverish people by selling the seeds at any price. Allow the farmers to collect their own seed, trade it freely, etc. The crops we have now will not be able to grow in the conditions that are coming -- in fact, they can't handle the conditions that already exist in some places.
Large corporations like Monsanto certainly haven't developed their modified seeds out of the goodness of their hearts. They mean to make a killing -- pun, such as it is, intended -- off the backs of poor countries everywhere.
The wealthy nations have largely made this problem, and the poor will have to pay disproportionately, as always happens. We create the conditions of their impoverishment, then offer to sell them -- at an outrageous price that they can't afford -- the means to avert the disaster. Then we offer to loan them the money -- at a hefty rate of interest -- to buy what they need from us. And they are back in the same old rut that they have always been in with respect to the First World. The World Bank and the IMF will tighten their grip on the poor once again.
I am not saying that this is a conscious or deliberate conspiracy. It isn't. But those who head the big seed and chemical firms are far from stupid, and while the U.S. government has been waffling about global warming -- which any fool can see has been going on for decades -- these individuals have set up their long-term research to take advantage of what they knew was coming. It was simply good business for them. By patenting their products, they ensured their enrichment at others' expense, regardless of how much they hurt those others. The article references other countries where they have patent filings, and many of them are poor.
A corporation has no conscience and only one imperative: profit. I'm guessing that nothing will shake them loose from their patents, nothing will induce them to sell the seeds for a reasonable price, and that that they will probably hire an army of police-types to watch that the farmers don't keep seed from their own crops or share with their neighbors. But we ought to try. The upheavals that are coming just might shake the foundations of the capitalist hegemony enough to bring about a more just and equitable system.
We really ought to try.
The heroin dealer model has worked well for big business exploiting third world nations for years, so don't expect them to change.
Patents owned by corporations are a huge PROBLEM not only in this arena, but also in prescription drugs and medical devices.
I know that patents are a "world" issue, not just the USA. But I also know the more corporate-loving Republicans you have in Congress, The Presidency and the Courts, the more uphill the fight shall be on behalf of citizens everywhere.
Another reason that Obama and a Democratic Congress are needed NOW, together with the Court nominees they could usher in for eight years.
Never have so many been controlled so completely by so few!
It's amazing really, how we all know what's going on but what do we do? SFA! Yes, decade by decade we just allow the Forces of Evil and Greed to trample all over us, to treat us as fools.
Will the worms turn eventually? Will we find our backbone one day?
P.S. Your car is more important than you! Check my blog for details.
Just so long as there is a buck in it!
These monsters have to be stopped. Period!
ACC: "The wealthy nations have largely made this problem, and the poor will have to pay disproportionately, as always happens."
The poor will likely be the first, but not the last to pay. Each and every one is a loss.
Please point me to a specific proposal by Obama that would abolish these sorts of corporate patents? Preferably to legislation in the US Senate that he's been fighting tooth and nail to get passed. After all, Obama is already one of the most powerful people in the country, so if he really believes this then it should be easy to show how he's already been fighting for this from that position of power.
Just sounds like more Obamabot BS to me. The Obamabots will say absolutely anything to try to con you into wasting your vote on him.
With traditional seed-saving in practice since the dawn of agriculture the crops are as adaptable or more than the wild varieties. The farmer knows his microclimates and saves seed selectively in anticipation of the climate change. Where the plots are too small for such variance, regional organizations select the seed from the appropriate plots. These organizations must be dedicated to preserving individual and local independence from far-flung capitalists. There is a huge diversity in traditional cultivars and as climates change these organizations shift the territory of each cultivar to the places where it is best adapted. It's an ongoing process. There is no role for the capitalist. There is however a role for cooperation and information exchange among the local organizations worldwide, to form a united front to keep the capitalist plague from infecting local organizations.
As usual, ETC mixes anti-corporate ideology and Green Hero posturing with a barely passing level of technical comprehension, producing a soup of grossly incoherent gibberish.
"But rather than an effective way to confront climate change, these so-called "climate-ready" crops will be used to drive farmers and governments onto a proprietary biotech platform."
Excuse me? How exactly will creating new crop varieties "drive farmers and governments" to use them, if in fact they do not prove to be relatively better adapted and beneficial e.g. in conditions brought about by climate change?
Did somebody claim that genetic engineering would free us from having to worry about controlling and reducing CO2 emissions? Or is ETC just upset at the idea that
"In a bid to win moral legitimacy for their controversial GM seeds, the Gene Giants are also teaming up with philanthro-capitalists to introduce climate-tolerant traits in the developing world."
"Philanthro-capitalists" Oh My!
Maybe they have a point that "Monopoly control of crop genes is a bad idea under any circumstances." But then again, what is ETC's problem with GE crops being patented if they don't want anyone to use them at all? OTOH, if they think that the benefits of biotechnology should be freely available to everyone, what is their problem with the Gates Foundation sponsoring the creation of crops that will be?
This is just the posing of First World pseudo-intellectual dilettantes, people who are committed first to a certain fashion and style, only secondarily (at best) to reason and accuracy. There is no coherent critique nor any progressive program for human advancement in it. It is really shameful.
GMO's CAN BE STOPPED
It is time for us to stop moaning and do something. I have posted this elsewhere but each and everyone of us can make a difference, see this interview with Jeffrey Smith and then scroll down to "Grassroots Consumer Action Could Halt Use of GM Crops in US"
http://www.organicconsumers.org/articles/article_10691.cfm
World Scientists Statement on GMO's and banning patents on life forms http://www.twnside.org.sg/title/world-cn.htm
Mark Abram
If anyone is talking gibberish its you. Were have you been these last ten years.
Christian Aid predicted ten years ago that GM crops would increase starvation and hunger instead of solve it and now the chickens have come home to roost.
Read their document - Selling Suicide: Farming, False Promises and Genetic Engineering in Developing Countries -
http://www.safeage.org/GM%20Free%20Food%20List%20Campaign/Christian%20Aid%20on%20GMOS.htm
It's generally not a good a idea to be solidly against any technology on principle. But the ownership and exploitation of the genetic formula for life-forms is a matter of political principle, and one which is it very easy to condemn.
Corporations have no right to ownership of genetic codes, no matter how high their R&D. All such existing acts of piracy should be revoked by the UN immmediately, and any company resisting should have its assets seized by the International Court of Human Rights, by force if necessary.
I've already got parents, and they gave up their claim to ownership of me a long time ago. I don't need Monsanto for my Daddy.
Good comment Little Richardjohn - Stop patents on life forms.