Biotech will be to African agriculture what the cellphone has been to telecommunications

by Calestous Juma*

The Kenyan parliament is debating a bill to enable the country to regulate agricultural biotechnology. Critics, however, argue that passing the law would pose threats to the environment, threaten the welfare of farmers and expose the people to unknown health risks.

To the contrary, failing to adopt the law will condemn Kenya to the backwaters of technological innovation. Adopting biotechnology will do for African agriculture what the mobile phone has done for telecommunications. It will revolutionize agriculture, offer new tools for managing the environment and expand economic opportunities for farmers.

Predicting technological doom is not new. Early critics of the microelectronics revolution claimed that labour-saving technologies would create unemployment and lead to economic decline. African countries caved in to the scaremongering and imposed restriction on key fields such as industrial automation. Such decisions contributed to the so-called “digital divide” that separate Africa from the rest the world.

Similar scare tactics are being used today to oppose a technology that has been adopted in much of the world. Biotechnology critics invoke arguments about the risks of biotechnology to the environment and human health. But they fail to consider the risks that Africa would face if it did not adopt biotechnology. If they succeed, their acts will result in a “genomics divide” that will isolate Africa from the most significant scientific advance of our times.

The critics take an adversarial approach that assumes that modern biotechnology cannot co-exist with traditional organic farming practices. They are wrong here too. The European Union, for example, is now looking into the merits of co-existence between organic farming and biotechnology.

Scientists argue that some genetic engineering techniques will lead to products that require less chemical use and could therefore be classified as “organic.” In many cases such technologies will offers the best options available for society to promote sustainable development.

Much of the concern about biotechnology is a veiled critique on the fact that large multinational enterprises own patents to key techniques. The common approach used to deal with such monopolies has been to attack the enterprises. Two decades of corporate-bashing has hardly improved the welfare of the poor.

A different strategy is needed. For example, donor agencies interested in improving African agriculture could support efforts to secure enabling technologies and put them in the hands of institutions.

An example of such an institution is the Nairobi-based African Agricultural Technology Foundation (AATF) that is creating a pool of patents of relevance to African agriculture. AATF can then make the seed available to African farmers without having to pay royalties on the patents.

Africa must develop the self-confidence needed to deal with enterprises that hold patents that are critical to their welfare. It is only through engagement with such enterprises that Africa will learn how to use those techniques. If they do not, they will be unable to benefit from the technologies even if they are off patent.

Critics of new technologies are right to make their concerns known. But they must also bear responsibility for the negative impacts of their action. One way to ensure this is for Africa to adopt laws against technological vandalism in all its manifestations.

*Professor Calestous Juma teaches at Harvard University’s Kennedy School of Government

Business Daily Africa