The future of wheat

Genetically modified wheat would increase yields, cut pesticide use and give Canadian farmers a global edge - Rolf Penner

Financial Post August 18, 2009 -

Nine wheat organizations in Australia, Canada and the United States, among them the North American Millers’ Association, recently released a joint statement that called for a synchronized introduction of genetically modified (GM) wheat into the marketplace.

The trend toward major biotech crops in soybeans, corn and canola is already well established over the past dozen years. It is high time that wheat joins their ranks.

The potential benefits of extending this technology to wheat are quite real, for both producers and consumers, as a recently updated study by British economists Graham Brookes and Peter Barfoot demonstrates. The authors note that GM varieties help generate higher yields for many farmers and therefore increase overall crop production. Biotech crops also significantly increase farmers’ incomes, reduce the need for pesticide spraying and cut greenhouse-gas emissions from agriculture.

First, the economic benefits: In every country where biotech crops are grown, farmers have seen noticeable improvements in their bottom lines. In estimated dollar terms, GM use worldwide created $10-billion in benefits in 2007 alone and $44-billion from 1996-2007. That calculation includes both cost reductions and increased yields. In 2007, biotech crops yielded 32 million tonnes more in production than conventional crops would have delivered. If these biotech crops had not been planted, another 29 million acres of land — the equivalent of 17% of the total farmland in Canada — would have been required to make up the difference.

One of the best economic comparisons looks at the difference between Canadian and Australian canola growers. We embraced GM canola early on, while the Aussies decided to stick with conventional breeding. The result, according to Dr. Christopher Preston from the University of Adelaide, is stark. While the Australians were not able to generate any kind of price premium for their GM-free canola, Canadian growers enjoyed a 20%-25% gain in crop yields. The economic advantage went to Canada.

With about 20% of the world’s food calories coming from wheat, and wheat acres steadily declining over the past 30 years because it is more economical for farmers to grow other things, the obvious benefit to consumers comes from higher yielding crops. They will ensure a steady supply of affordable wheat for future consumption.

When it comes to the environment, Brookes and Barfoot report that, since 1996, GM crops have reduced the global use of pesticides by 792 million pounds (360 million kilograms), a significant reduction of almost 9%. Equally important, they claim that the global environmental impact from pesticide use — a slightly different calculation — fell by more than 17% due to the use of GM varieties, again a significant reduction.

Further, for those who, despite evidence to the contrary, are still convinced that mankind causes global warming, GM crops can play an important role in the reduction of CO2 dumping. The study shows that the use of diesel fuel falls because GM use means less need to spray pesticides and a dramatic reduction in the amount of tillage required. A reduced tillage also increases the amount of carbon stored in the soil. In 2006, these two factors combined enabled an estimated reduction of almost 15 billion kilograms of CO2 emissions into the atmosphere due to the use of GM crops — the equivalent of removing more than six million cars from the road for one year.

The potential benefits go beyond these. One of the first problems GM wheat eliminates is a common fungus, fusarium, which attacks wheat and produces deadly mycotoxins. A new experimental wheat variety from Australia’s Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation alters the grain’s starch composition, an improvement that shows great promise in reducing the incidence of bowel disease, diabetes and obesity. Others are looking into the addition of a small molecule called resveratrol, commonly found in red wine that may help prevent age-related disorders like neurodegenerative diseases and cardiovascular disease. Contrary to what some anti-GM activists claim, wheat allergies could actually be reduced by specially breeding wheat with proteins, starches and glutens that no longer trigger the same allergic reactionsthat  conventional wheat varieties do.

Those who oppose GM wheat also frequently claim that GM foods have not been properly tested, or they assert that few independent studies have been published to establish their safety. Another claim is that regulatory agencies rely exclusively on corporate information to decide whether GM foods are safe. They are wrong on all three counts. Currently more than 270 peer-reviewed reports in the scientific literature document the general safety and nutritional wholesomeness of GM foods.

If we gave GM wheat the green light today, it would be six to 10 years before we’d see a commercialized product. That’s all the more reason to move forward with it now. The benefits for consumers and farmers are obvious and the safety record is excellent, with the rewards far outweighing any possible risks the naysayers might imagine.

Even if other countries are reluctant to move ahead, the canola example shows us that GM wheat would open up great opportunities for Canada if we were to go first. Let’s get on with it.

Financial Post

Rolf Penner is a Manitoba farmer and the Manitoba vice-president of the Western Canadian Wheat Growers Association, one of the organizations calling for the synchronized introduction of GM wheat.