|
Biodiversity
Conservation and Agrobiotechnology
By: Anton
G. Endress
People have
exploited the Earth’s natural resources and modified the environment for
thousands of years, but in the last two centuries human impact has increased
dramatically, in part because of rapid population growth, in part because of
technological changes, and partly as a consequence of the way that development
has been permitted to proceed. Summarized by Vitousek et al. (1997), the
earth’s land surface has been transformed via agriculture, industry,
international commerce, and urbanization, resulting in the alteration of major
biogeochemical cycles and the addition or removal of species and genetically
distinct populations in most of Earth’s ecosystems. In turn these changes have
further altered ecosystem functioning by driving global climate change and
causing irreversible loss of biological diversity. Since the human domination
of Earth’s ecosystems in substantial and growing, the already heavy demands
placed on the world’s natural resources and environment are likely to be
increasingly severe.
The
resulting circumstances have led to the promotion of diverse approaches to
curtail the growing burden of human activities; some of the most frequently
mentioned are curbing biodiversity losses, reducing habitat fragmentation,
decreasing population growth, increasing the efficiency of food production,
altering the distribution of food, and improving assess to nutritious foods.
For many, the elaboration of sustainable development programms offers a
promising solution.
Sustainable
development is concerned with stewardship of both natural and human resources.
Its main goals are environmental health, economic profitability, environmental
justice, and social, economic, and intergenerational equity. Sustainability
seeks optimum use of the environment in satisfying basic human needs at the
minimum, and more if possible, for an indefinite future. How realistic is it to
sustain, and where possible, improve the ‘quality of life’ for all the world’s
people, now numbering more than 6 billion? Economic development and
environmental protection seem to be incompatible after all. Sustainable
development’s promoters frequently advocate for centralization,
internationalization, and rapid economic development. And many implicitly
support maintenance of a much higher standard of living than the "basic human
needs" level. Its detractors argue that biodiversity has intrinsic value and
giving dollar values to all natural resources is useless, if not harmful. Given
the lack of a clearly defined endpoint or goal and the number and complexity of
social, energy, resource, economic, and demographic transitions that are
required, it is not surprising that sustainability has yet to be achieved.
Values in
conflict?
Humans have
an ethical responsibility to assist in the recovery of species we have driven
to the brink of extinction and a moral responsibility to provide food to those
with whom we share this world. Is it possible to satisfy both responsibilities
and achieve sustainability? Is there as alternative to pitting the demands of
hunger and food security against the need for habitat preservation and
biodiversity
conversation?
Agrobiotechnology,
the
cultivation of genetically modified plants and animals, is increasingly
championed as a breakthrough in efforts to achieve sustainability.
Agrobiotechnology offers a faster, more precise version of age-old human
efforts at hybridization and selective breeding of plants and animals.
Proponents of agrobiotechnology point to the opportunities for reducing hunger
and improving food security while simultaneously promoting ecological
sustainability. At a recent appearance in
Illinois,
World Food Prize recipient Badrinarayan Barwale stated that "genetically
modified crops are the foundation for the next huge advance in food
production". Significant resources are being invested by the public and
private sectors to map the genetics of agriculturally important crops. Numerous
genetically modified organisms are already in the marketplace, and the pipeline
of new GMO products is enormous. The potential for creating ‘plant factories’
that produce everything from pharmaceuticals to petroleum products through
genetic manipulation is clearly on the horizon.
Crops may be
genetically modified for increased productivity, expanded land use, cropping
intensification, or a combination of these. Examples include crops that are new
or contain one or a combination of several improved characteristics that
ultimately result in larger yields, lower production costs, or value-added
benefits: enhanced photosynthesis, reduced fertilizer use, greater resistance
to pests and diseases, improved water use efficiency, drought tolerance, or
temperature hardiness, longer post-harvest storage, improved processing
quality, enhanced content of nutraceuticals and other biologically-active
substances, and suitability for shorter rotation, high density, or multiple
cropping systems. One focus of current agrobiotechnology research is the effort
to enhance production of anti-carcinogens in food crops. Plant scientists are
scouring ancient wisdom and tropical cultures seeking insights into the
medicinal properties of plants. As the medical community verifies medicinal
properties, plant scientists will develop production practices to insure a
supply of important new crops to the marketplace, and promising plants will be
genetically modified to enhance traits creating specific health-promoting
attributes. These designer foods will be targeted to individuals with specific
dietary needs or those at risk for certain types of disease.
But compare
the potential opportunities against the historic record. According to a recent
World-Watch Institute report "Nature’s Cornucopia: Our Stake in Plant
Diversity," landscape fragmentation, pressure from non-native species, and
adoption of industrial agriculture have caused the loss of traditional crop
varieties (examples include an estimated loss of 90% of traditional wheat
varieties in China since World War II; Mexican farmers are raising an estimated
20% of the corn varieties cultivated in the 1930s; and an estimated loss of 80%
of the seed varieties sold a century ago in the U.S.). The erosion of genetic
diversity of cultivated plants reduces the capacity to breed more productive
and disease-resistant crop varieties. Similarly historic plant collecting and
exploitation were so severe that international treaties were needed to protect
the ecologic and economic interests of countries harboring important species.
Opponents of
agrobiotechnology argue that cultivation of genetically modified organisms will
accelerate the already substantial loss of genetic diversity and is
unnecessary, at least with respect to increased food production. Rather, food
impoverishment and human hunger are seen as the result of inequities involving
access to education, capital, and inadequate food distribution systems.
Opponents also contend that adoption of agrobiotechnology is likely to cause
substantial ecological disruption because it facilitates the use of marginal
and presently unusable lands and impacts natural ecosystems in unknown ways.
There also are concerns about gene escape and the development of highly
resistant plant and animal pests. Recent research showing the mortality of
monarch butterfly larvae that had consumed Bt corn pollen placed on milkweed
leaves indicates a cautious approach is certainly warranted, especially when
the genetic modification involves the transfer of genes between unrelated
organisms.
Whither
agrobiotechnology
and biodiversity conservation?
Because of
the large costs and biological risks of rescuing endangered species,
conservationists typically seek ecosystem approaches for saving biological
diversity. For them, reversing the accelerating curve of species extinction
through in situ habitat protection solves the biodiversity crisis. Habitat
protection, in turn, requires there be no additional land or resource
exploitation for agricultural, industrial, mining, or development purposes. Is
habitat protection feasible while simultaneously responding to the need for
food self-sufficiency, within the growing global community?
Part of the
answer seems clear: increased human involvement will be required for there to
be any chance of conserving biodiversity and maintaining the normal functioning
of ecosystems. Without thoughtful, deliberate, and cautious human
participation, how else can populations, species, and ecosystems be maintained
along with the flow of goods and services they provide? The unwanted impacts of
agriculture must be weighed against the world demand for food, commodities, and
livelihoods. Agrobiotechnology seems to be one of the tools that advance us
towards sustainability. The dilemma is whether enough is known to fully embrace
it.
Agrobiotechnology offers promise for biodiversity conservation, food security,
human health, and global sustainability provided:
·
its use is
deliberate, selective, cautious, and alert to unknown dangers,
·
accessibility is open to everyone regardless of the economic status of the
country or culture,
·
newly
generated products and services are optimized with respect to differing
production practices and systems and utilization of natural resources, and
·
its
collective impacts on ecological resources are negative.
Rampant,
unthinking adoption of agrobiotechnology is more likely a harbinger of an
accelerated global loss of biodiversity than a leap toward sustainability.
There are significant environmental risks from agrobiotechnology products that
extend production to marginal lands or fail to lessen the need for specialized
chemical and equipment inputs. Similarly, countries and/or cultures denied
access to genetically modified organisms will have no choice but to continue
the current ecological-destructive agricultural practices. Agrobiotechnology
products that benefit the environment and move societies closer to
sustainability are those that achieve crop yields on the same or less area
currently cultivated, require less fertilizers and/or pesticides, use water
more efficiently, are compatible with traditional production systems, and
possess known impacts on natural ecosystems. Under these circumstances,
agrobiotechnology can be a blessing for feeding humankind as well as for the
environment.
Dr. Anton G. Endress is associated with the Department of
Natural Resources and Environmental Sciences, University of Illinois, 1101 West
Peabody Drive, Urbana, Illinois, USA 61801). |
