![]() |
![]() |
||||
| Organic Sci. Cluster | About Us | Top 10 | Français | ||
| British Columbia | Alberta | Saskatchewan | Manitoba | ||
| Ontario | Québec | Atlantic | Donate | ||
| Research
Extension
Courses
Consumers
-------------------------- |
Small Farmers’ Struggle RecognizedBy Jennifer Bromm Three Bt cotton hybrids have been disallowed for cultivation in Andhra Pradesh, India following reports from farm organizations and release of a three year study on the agronomy of these varieties and their impact on farmers in the region. The study was released at the Southern Encounters conference in Hyderabad India in April. I was there to witness the event. Three years ago the agro industry introduced genetically engineered cotton to India. These hybrids contain a gene from a bacterium (Bacillus thuringiensis) that allows them to produce a toxin to protect against bollworms. The biotech industry claimed that Bt cotton would bring economic benefits, especially for smallholder farmers. The Andhra Pradesh Coalition in Defense of Diversity (APCIDD) and the Deccan Development Society (DDS) initiated a systematic study with the following objectives:
Most small scale farmers in India do not keep detailed records, therefore
researchers visited farmers every evening to log their activities. During
the three years of the study, researchers visited 164 to 220 farmers for
structured interviews that recorded each farmer’s income and expenditure
patterns in regard to cultivation of Bt and non Bt cotton as well as the
status of the crop, pest damage, and the use of fertilizers and pesticides.
Participants were randomly selected and results were categorized by farm
size and by whether the farm was irrigated or rainfed. In economic terms, the Bt cotton was not the success story that was anticipated.
Farmers that used Bt cotton paid more than three times as much for their
seed. The Bt cotton required greater fertilizer inputs. In total, most
often the non Bt cotton farmer made more than the Bt cotton farmer. One
of the difficulties with the Bt cotton was its greater vulnerability to
harsh conditions: drought, low fertility, insects other than those specifically
targeted by the Bt, and disease. The Bt cotton was aggressively marketed
to small scale farmers on rainfed land as an answer to their economic
problems. Although the Bt cotton might show agronomic promise under optimal
conditions, it did not meet the needs of small scale, rainfed farms. |
||||
© 2011, Organic Agriculture Centre of Canada (OACC)