As the uproar generated by Nigeria’s adoption of genetically modified crops swells, stakeholders have continued to thrash claims of the initiative being the solution to food insecurity, raising safety posers that advocate must not gloss over, GBENGA AKINFENWA and JOKE FALAJU report.

The endless criticisms and arguments trailing the adoption of Genetically Modified Crops (GMOs), commonly called GM seeds by the country, are eliciting anxiety over food and agro commodities safety.

The anxiety and attendant fears have left several Nigerians more confused than ever, especially as some interested parties claim that the Federal Government may, through the adoption, be exposing citizens to products or risky technologies without adequate, independent, and long-term assessment of their impacts on human and environmental health.

Even though the adoption has, over the years been a subject of intense debate among scientists, environmentalists, food activists, and Civil Society Organisations (CSOs), the Federal Government and proponents of this initiative, claim that GMOs are capable of addressing a range of agriculture, nutrition and climatic challenges in developing countries like Nigeria.

What, however, has been concerning to critics of this initiative, is that while some developing countries are responding to these multiple worries by outright banning, or attempting to find a balance between the concerns and needs of all sides, the Federal Government endorsed GM crops outrightly.

According to a report by the International Service for the Acquisition of Agri-biotech Applications (ISAAA), Nigeria tops the list of six African countries that have adopted, and now planting genetically modified crops, alongside Ethiopia, Malawi, South Africa, Sudan, and Swaziland.

The ISAAA revealed that at least 33 major food crops have been genetically modified across the globe out of which Nigeria has approved four – maize, cowpea, cotton, and soybean, for commercialisation.

The last entrant – TELA maize, is a maize variety that has been genetically engineered for improved insect resistance, and drought tolerance to boost farmers’ yield per hectare, and also complement existing demand gaps.

Its approval and commercial release placed Nigeria second on the list of African countries that have adopted and commercialised the TELA maize varieties, behind South Africa.

With the adoption, according to the African Agriculture Technology Foundation (AATF), yields of TELA maize could reach up to 10 tonnes per hectare if grown under good agronomic practices, as against an estimated 12.7 million metric tonnes (MMT) of corn, with an average yield of 2.2 tonnes per hectare produced in the year 2022/2023.

This development has rejuvenated the debate between adopting agricultural biotechnology in line with the industrial agriculture model or sticking with conventional crop production methods also known as agroecology, or regenerative agriculture.

In this direction, experts have argued that biotechnology is merely under the guise of enhancing agricultural productivity, and fostering economic development, but locked in monocultures, loss of biodiversity, seed monopoly, and seed and food colonialism, as well as, loss of biodiversity and nutritional diversity and soil degradation.

They claimed that agroecology on the other hand would deliver increased productivity and economic resilience, as well as, nourish and revive ecosystems thereby strengthening local economies, mitigating climate/environmental crises, and promoting food sovereignty. On their part, farmers have asserted that GM crops performed poorly after the first planting season, thereby underscoring one of the major concerns with the seeds, as they are forced to go back to seed companies to purchase new seeds every planting season.

The Director of Health of the Mother Earth Foundation (HOMEF), Nninmo Bassey, opined that GMOs are riding on the wave of global fetishisation of technology through which technology is considered a silver bullet, noting that besides posing difficulties to regulatory frameworks, GM crops directly impact on human health, “as well as socio-economic rights of our peoples.”

He pointed out that GMOs are plants, animals, or microorganisms that have undergone fundamental changes at the cellular level and can no longer be considered natural, adding that most of them are engineered to withstand dangerous herbicides, which kill other species except the engineered ones.

According to Bassey: “Genetically modified crops are genetically engineered to act as pesticides ostensibly to kill identified pests that would otherwise attack crops or seeds. Examples include Bt Cotton and Bt Cowpea or beans approved for commercial release in Nigeria. The implication of eating a seed engineered to kill a pest is that you are eating a pesticide with unexamined implications, including on the microbes in our guts.”

Even though GMOs are promoted in the country based on their capacity to address food insecurity, he however, said that after nearly three decades of introduction in the world, they have failed to eradicate or reduce hunger. “Rather, they are locked in the system that promotes hunger by degrading soils, reducing biodiversity, disregarding the knowledge of local food producers, and concentrating power in the hands of a few market players.

“The truth is that we don’t need GMOs to feed our population. This technology threatens the lives and rights of our local farmers who have selected and preserved seeds, crops, and animal varieties over the centuries. Our farmers have kept the stock of varieties that both provide food and meet our medicinal, cultural, and other needs.”

“In a country like Nigeria, consumers are unable to exercise the right to choose whether or not to consume GMOs due to the peculiar way food is sold and consumed. We cannot label the foods and seeds largely sold on the roadside, in the traffic, and an assortment of our informal markets. This is if labeling were to even be successfully enforced,” he explained.

An agriculture expert, Mrs Juliet Asogwa, who said that Nigerians are not hungry for lack of food, but for lack of means to get the food, urged farmers to stop using inorganic fertilisers and pesticides on their farms.

“It is important to note that the introduction, cultivation, and trade of GMOs at a minimum should adhere to robust regulatory frameworks that prioritise biosafety and safeguard the public interest. Nigeria, like many countries, has enacted legislation and established regulatory bodies to oversee the assessment, approval, and monitoring of GMOs. The National Biosafety Management Agency (NBMA) Act 2015 (as amended)

“Civil society groups have pointed loopholes in the NBMA 2015 Act that prevent the legislation from adequately safeguarding the health and interest of the Nigerian people, but notwithstanding, GMOs are approved for use in Nigeria in a way that does not conform to the provisions of the Act, or global best standards.

“Just as the recently approved TELA Maize, which is said to be a transgenic insect-resistant and drought-tolerant variety, this is coming at a time when Mexico, the centre of origin of maize has halted the cultivation of genetically engineered corn to preserve local and more nutritious varieties despite heavy pressures from vested interests.”

The Director of Programmes and Project Lead for Hunger Politics at HOMEF, Joyce Brown, said: “We don’t need GMOs to feed our population. Our farmers have selected and preserved seeds, crops, and animal varieties over the centuries. They have kept a stock of varieties that both provide food and meet our medicinal and other needs. They kept the norms that preserved biodiversity.

“What is of utmost importance is enhancing the health of our soil – which ensures their resilience to environmental stressors; building biodiversity instead of encouraging monocultures, which helps pests to thrive; and supporting farmers with needed access to credits, land, infrastructure, and access to markets.

“We cannot afford to turn our people into guinea pigs or allow promoters of the technology to deceive our farmers into believing that they are given improved seeds when in fact they are trapped into planting seeds of dubious safety claims,” Brown stated With all these red flags waving, proponents have argued that by using genetic engineering techniques, scientists can develop crops that are more resistant to pests and diseases; have a longer shelf life, and are more nutritious.

The Minister of Innovation, Science and Technology, Uche Nnaji, while speaking at a press conference held in Abuja, recently, described the commercial release of the crop as a remarkable step at enhancing agricultural productivity to ensure food sufficiency in Nigeria.

He also stated that this move would strengthen Nigeria’s position in the global agricultural landscape, fostering economic stability and opening new avenues for trade and export, claiming that the benefits of the release were far-reaching, promising increased crop yields, enhanced resilience to pests and diseases, reduced environmental impact, and improved nutrition content.

The Director of Agricultural Biotechnology Department, National Biotechnology Development Agency (NABDA), Rose Gidado, said that no traces of ill health or safety concerns have been traced to the previous commercialised biotech crops in the market.

“Considering the uncertainties of the number of GM crops in the market, it is very important to give this update on the status of GM crops in the country with precise traits and approval status. Biotechnology offers new tools for increasing agricultural productivity and protecting food crops from climate changes, such as heat, floods, and drought.”

On its part, the Federal Government assured that it will ensure that GM crops do not affect the country’s rich biodiversity, which includes about 7,895 plant species, and 22,000 vertebrate and invertebrate species.

The Director General of National Biosafety Management Agency, Dr Agnes Asagbra, said the law safeguarding human health from potential risks associated with GMOs, like food safety, has been taken care of by regulating modern biotechnology and the law that supports agricultural modernisation and others, adding that modern biotechnology began in Nigeria 21 years ago, and has now been accepted.

Asagbra stated: “We have been proactive in the field of biosafety, recognizing early on the potential of the innovation and the need for a robust regulatory framework. We will ensure the safe handling, transportation, and use of living-modified organisms (LMOs).

“Biosafety is not just a policy; it is a commitment to safeguarding our nation’s health, biodiversity, and environment. We will monitor technological advancement, particularly in agriculture that are beneficial and pose no harm to people or our land.”

According to her, Nigeria’s biosafety processes are at par with, if not ahead of those in other African countries like Kenya, Malawi, and South Africa, adding that the country received international recognition for her robust regulatory framework, taking also into account risks to human health.