Opening Statement

By Josué Dioné
Director, Sustainable Development Division
UN Economic Commission for Africa

United Nations Conference Center, Addis Ababa
February 7-9 2006

Representative of the International Service for the Acquisition of Agricultural biotechnology Applications (ISAAA),
Representative of Agricultural Biotechnology Support Programme (ABSPII),
Distinguished guests of the Media,
Dear Colleagues of the UN system,
Ladies and gentlemen,

On behalf of the Executive Secretary of the United Nations Economic Commission for Africa, I am pleased to welcome you to this training workshop designed to improve public understanding and coverage of biotechnology issues. While most of you were drawn from eastern and central Africa, the outcomes of this workshop will resonate throughout Africa, helping to clarify issues in a manner that will help our governments and leaders make the best decisions for themselves.

That this training workshop is devoted specifically to the media testifies to the significant role you play in the whole biotech debate; we neglect you at our peril. It is now well acknowledged that journalists are key partners in the development, transfer and application of modern biotechnology and that they should not be neglected.

This workshop is based on a simple premise: If journalists understand the truth about biotech, then, they would be able to report more accurately in a manner that clarifies.

Ladies and Gentlemen

Biological technology or biotechnology is a term used to represent a continuum of different bio-techniques ranging from simple non-controversial tissue culture to genetic engineering or gene-splicing embodied in ‘modern biotechnology’. It is now considered as the leading technology of the 21st century with tremendous potential to address economic, social and environmental issues afflicting the poor in the developing nations.

It is, as you know, a tool of great opportunities and many challenges. Its potential impacts and benefits are enormous in the areas of agricultural development, health care, trade, environment and natural resources management, industry, energy development etc. In particular, it provides a way forward in these areas where earlier methods were less successful.

However, no tool, in recent times, has been as scrutinized and beset with controversies as modern biotechnology. These controversies are particularly overwhelming in food and agriculture. Today, the same public opinion, which is quick to accept the innovations and hope generated by biotech in the field of health, is also quick to resist its application in food and agricultural production.

Genetically modified food is easily referred to as unsafe Frankenstein food; it is a monster that is inevitably bound to destroy its creator and everybody in its paths. Interestingly, insulin, which is obtained through genetically modified bacteria, is widely used by millions around the world.

But other products have not been that lucky: they have been derided and mis-categorized, sparking a wave of needless fear. Opponents are against "golden rice," a genetically modified variety that could prevent blindness in millions of children and alleviate vitamin A deficiency in millions more. Others have vandalized research facilities where the safety of genetically modified foods is tested and new varieties are developed.

For these people, even the likelihood that such foods could be safe is unacceptable.

As Bertrand Russell said years ago in “An Outline of Intellectual Rubbish”, in a situation of fear, almost everyone becomes superstitious. And where policy is based on superstition and public debate is fueled by fear and misinformation, there is a real possibility that the dividends of science will be lost.

Ladies and Gentlemen,

There is no risk free technology and nobody claims that modern biotechnology is risk-free. Every activity in life carries some degree of risk. And, no doubt, there are legitimate concerns about several important aspects of biotechnology, including those relating to biosafety and biodiversity, which we should not underestimate. Let there be no doubt that we must take these concerns very seriously. At the same time, let’s not forget that thousands of road fatalities are recorded in Africa every year but we still enjoy driving our cars. The fear of plane crash has not stopped us from flying.
Many conventional crops cause allergic reactions, and yet, we accept these risks and consume these crops. We also accept that some foods are riskier than others, and while we may handle them with more care, we still eat them.

Genetic modification is not new. Ever since man turned from hunter-gatherer into breeder and farmer, he has tamed animals and plants and altered -- sometimes deliberately -- their genetic makeup.

Therefore, agricultural practices have not been "natural” for 10,000 years. With the exception of wild berries and wild mushrooms, virtually all the grains, fruits and vegetables we eat today (including "organic" ones) are, strictly speaking, genetically modified. Potatoes, tomatoes, oats, rice and corn, for example, are derived from plants created during the past half-century by extensive cross hybridizations that transcend natural breeding boundaries.

As stated by Klaus Ammann of the Botanical Garden, University of Bern in Switzerland, "when we eat wheat, we consume varieties mutated by nuclear radiation and yet, we have been eating this wheat for decades without any type of problem. Similarly, for more than a decade, farmers have cultivated gene-spliced plants on more than 100 million acres annually and not a single ecosystem has been disrupted, or person injured, by any gene-spliced product.

My friends,

Let me recommend a quick look at a book titled The Blank Slate: The Modern Denial of Human Nature by Prof. Pinker of Harvard University who examined biotechnology- related fear and the roots of public risk aversion.

Prof. Pinker says the fear of genetically modified foods “arises from the carcinogen-du-jour school of journalism that uncritically reports any study showing elevated cancer. He also said that this fear is the standard human intuition that every living thing has an essence. Natural foods are thought to have the pure essence of the plant or animal and to carry with them the rejuvenating powers of the pastoral environment in which they grow. Genetically modified foods, or foods containing artificial additives, are thought of as being deliberately laced with a contaminant tainted by its origins in an acrid laboratory or factory. And he adds: “Arguments that invoke genetics, biochemistry, evolution, and risk analysis are likely to fall on deaf ears when pitted against this deep-rooted way of thinking”.

Therefore, considerable effort is needed to convince those who, for one reason or another, have already made up their mind against GM foods, no matter what the facts are. Bio-scientists have not been able to do the job. They need you. And the daunting challenge you will face is to succeed where they have failed.

You will not succeed if you are simply a conduit of what you hear, neither will you do so if you let base your views on personal, emotional or political grounds.

You will only succeed when you know as much as possible about the subjects you are dealing with.

Through guided interactions with bio-scientists, you will learn to uncover that which is covered. This will help you convince yourselves that there is nothing mystic about modern biotechnology and that there is nothing to hide for that matter. We want your coverage of biotechnology issues to be regarded as nothing but the truth, based on scientific knowledge.

We have strong expectations that the training you will receive this week will help achieve this goal. Therefore, it will be your duty to shift the debate over genetically modified organisms to a more balanced and scientific plane, to dissipate the persisting fear about biotech and help factor modern biotechnology into Africa’s development process.

I wish you a successful workshop.

Thank you