News Release - Call for rejection of World Bank-GEF projects

[Guest guest]

Tue, 27 Jun 2006 15:39:07 -0500

etcgroup

ETC Group: News Release - Call for rejection of World

Bank-GEF projects

 

 

 

 

News Release / June 27th 2006

 

 

Groups in Latin America and Africa call for rejection of

World Bank-GEF biosafety projects

 

Two World Bank projects, with funding from the GEF (Global

Environmental Facility), propose to introduce genetically modified

crops such as maize, potatoes, cassava, rice and cotton into five

Latin American and four African countries that are centers of origin

or diversity for these and other major food crops. Civil society

organizations warn that DNA contamination from genetically modified

crops poses an unacceptable risk to stable crops that are the basis of

peasant economies in these regions. The multi-million dollar projects

are being promoted under the guise of scientific biosafety research,

but civil society organizations on both continents are calling for

their immediate rejection because they threaten food sovereignty and

farmer-controlled seed systems.

 

The African Center for Biosafety, the Network for Latin America Free

of Transgenics and the international organizations Grain and ETC Group

have released an in-depth analysis of two World Bank projects: West

Africa Regional Biosafety Project affecting Mali, Burkina Faso,

Senegal and Togo; and Latin American Multi-Country Capacity Building

in Biosafety, to be implemented in Brazil, Colombia, Costa Rica,

Mexico and Peru.

 

" Although they are presented as 'biosafety' projects, these proposals

pave the way for the introduction of GM varieties of staple crops that

are of fundamental importance to peasant communities " said Elizabeth

Bravo from the Network for Latin America Free of Transgenics.

 

The project participants include research institutions within the

different countries, the International Center for Tropical Agriculture

(CIAT, based in Colombia, a member of the Consultative Group on

International Agricultural Research, CGIAR) and the World Bank.

Project advisors include AfricaBio and PRRI (Public Research and

Regulation Initiative), industry-affiliated organizations that are

well-known promoters of GM crops. Civil society organizations point

out that, by opening new markets to GM crops, it is the biotech

industry that is the true beneficiary of the project.

 

According to Grain, " The projects are clearly driven by an outside

agenda. At their core is a long-standing strategy pursued by the World

Bank and the US government to harmonise GM crops regulations across

regions in order to override national processes that are more

susceptible to local opposition. The idea is to establish favourable

regulations in a few key countries and then use these regulations as a

model that can be imposed on neighbouring countries by regional

bodies. In this way, they side-step any possible democratic debate and

provide corporations with a large, one-stop shop for their GM crops. "

 

Recalling the DNA contamination of native maize grown by peasant

farmers in Mexico, Silvia Ribeiro of ETC Group points out, " The

Mexican government has done nothing to hinder the illegal GM

contamination of peasant maize in Mexico. On the contrary, they have

exempted the companies from responsibility by passing a national

biosafety law that is popularly known as the 'Monsanto Law' because it

only protects the interests of transnational biotech companies, " adds

Ribeiro. The World Bank projects, explains Ribeiro, talk about

capacity building based on " science-based mechanisms " to manage

contamination, but, she says, " This doesn't exist; it is written to

mollify critics and give the false impression that it's possible to

introduce transgenic maize in Mexico in a 'safe' way, and to

demonstrate that GM can be introduced in other centers of origin and

diversity in the South. Contamination can only be 'managed' by farmers

and indigenous people who have been forced to develop strategies to

confront it. "

 

In the case of Africa, the project proposes to conduct experimental

field trials of GM crops, while in Latin America, " capacity building "

is proposed as the approach to managing crop contamination. In both

cases, the underlying assumption is that transgenic crops are already

being grown, or will be introduced in the near future, and thus, that

contamination is unavoidable. Therefore, the projects aim to develop

methods to manage it, along with " cost-benefit " analyses and ways to

manage public opinion as well.

 

" The projects ignore the possibility that GM crops are not allowed,

which is precisely what the majority of small farmers and peasant

communities in the targeted countries have demanded. If this reality

were respected, there would be no need to 'manage' contamination or

develop costly biosafety mechanisms because the crops wouldn't be

exposed to the risk of contamination, " declares Mariam Mayet from the

non-governmental African Center for Biosafety.

 

Genuine public debate and the opinions of the affected communities are

widely disregarded in the project proposals. Both project proposals

have been circulated in English only, while the official languages of

the targeted countries is French in Africa, and Spanish or Portuguese

in Latin America.

 

" It's scandalous that they are trying to legitimize the introduction

of GM crops in centers of origin and diversity, as is the case with

maize in Mexico, potatoes and cotton in Peru and cassava in Brazil.

Even rice, which doesn't originate in our region has been largely

adapted by peasants on our continent, becoming an important component

of local food, " said German Velez, from the Colombian civil society

organization Semillas. " Under the guise of 'scientific research' the

goal is to legitimate the contamination of seeds that are the basis of

peasant economies - and ultimately create dependence on corporate

seeds. Clearly, this only benefits the biotech industry, " continues Velez.

 

The project also proposes to educate authorities and the public in

order to link the idea of biosafety to biotechnology, and to achieve a

" less alarmist public discourse. "

 

" The GEF's so-called biosafety 'capacity building' has been denounced

all over the world as a public participation farce - its primary aim

is to win biosafety laws that are favorable to the biotech industry, "

agrees Eva Carazo, from the Biodiversity Coordination Network in Costa

Rica. " In Costa Rica, the Biodiversity Coordination Network demanded

that GEF stop giving funds for this purpose. But this time GEF is

coming back with even more dangerous projects, because this time it's

about introducing GM crops in the centers of origin and diversity for

those crops, " says Carazo.

 

The groups are demanding the cancellation of the projects, which have

not yet received final approval by the GEF.

 

The full analysis of the World Bank biosafety projects can be

downloaded here:

www.grain.org

http://www.etcgroup.org/article.asp?newsid=568

 

Groups in Africa, Latin America condemn World Bank biosafety projects

 

Released by:

African Centre for Biosafety - http://www.biosafetyafrica.net

ETC Group - http://www.etcgroup.org

GRAIN - http://www.grain.org

Red por una América Latina Libre de Trasngénicos - http://www.rallt.org

 

 

For more information please contact:

Mariam Mayet, South Africa - Email: mariammayet, Tel: + 27

83 2694309

Elizabeth Bravo, Ecuador - Email: ebravo, Tel: +593 (2) 254 7516

Silvia Ribeiro, ETC Group, Mexico, - Email: silvia, Tel:

+52 55 5563 2664

 

ETC Group mailing list

http://lists.etcgroup.org/mailman/listinfo/etcgroup