Dialogue: GM free has commercial benefit

By SEAGER MASON*

There are compelling commercial reasons New Zealand should adopt a position of being genetic engineering free. First we must define what that means, then establish what the benefits and costs would be and how it would be put into practice ... in a similar way to the establishment of our nuclear free policy.

Most of the environmental, organic, primary industry, science, and other groups supporting a GM-free NZ are defining it as no use, no development, and no importation of genetically modified organisms in our agriculture or environment. This would restrict the use of GM to appropriate and cost-effective uses in laboratory research and in medicines.

The commercial benefits from New Zealand remaining GM free have been outlined in two reports - the Ministry for the Environment's Valuing New Zealand's Clean Green Image and the Lincoln University Commerce Division paper titled Economic Analysis of Issues Surrounding Commercial Release of GM Food Products in New Zealand.

Both have gone some way toward measuring the dollar value of the clean green image for our exports and tourism.

The ministry's report shows that the average dairy farm gains $30,000 to $40,000 in income each year from the marketing of dairy products overseas using NZ's clean green image, and that this and other commercial advantages would be lost if we went with GM.

The Lincoln report says the preferred option is to delay GM until the extent of negative consumer attitude is known.

To most overseas markets, clean and green is viewed as unpolluted farmland and the natural environment, with extensive natural farming systems.

These same markets view genetic manipulation of food, along with other intensive agricultural practices which have led to food scares such as BSE, with increasing suspicion.

This even extends to livestock feeds. Some markets have banned livestock products from livestock fed on GM feed. This is also happening in New Zealand with Tegel saying it would use GM-free soy for its chicken production.

As a country reliant on the export of food, New Zealand cannot afford to ignore strong world market signals.

As a cost, it is claimed that being GM free would cause an exodus of our scientists.

It is difficult to see why this should happen when our organic producers are crying out for applied research to help them develop their systems.

New Zealand could become an international centre of excellence for holistic systems-based research into biological agriculture. This would enhance our marketing edge for exports and tourism.

Again the parallel with our nuclear-free policy is that we have no scientists working on nuclear power and weapons, but we have become world leaders in producing clean renewable hydro power.

We should build on our natural advantages.

How would we make a GM-free position work ? The most critical issue would be guarantees that imported seed is GM free. This would require traceability and testing protocols for all imported seed.

The adoption of a GM-free position would be far simpler than the complex controls being promoted for buffer zones (if we were to mix GM with GM-free agriculture) in NZ.

The benefits of a GM free position are clear - guaranteed and preferential access to lucrative markets for our agricultural exports, and a strong image to promote tourism. If, or when, overseas markets start to accept GM food, then we would have the option of reviewing our position.

* Seager Mason is chief executive of Bio-Gro NZ, an organic certifier.

nzherald.co.nz/ge

Report of the Royal Commission on Genetic Modification

GE lessons from Britain

GE links

GE glossary