|
 |
|
Posted 26 January 2010
1-NEWS RELEASE: CROP BIOFORTIFICATION, KEY TO MEETING MDGs
2-NEWS FEATURE: ADDRESSING BIOSAFETY CONCERNS: HOW SAFE
IS BIOTECHNOLOGY?
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1-CROP
BIOFORTIFICATION, KEY TO MEETING MDGs
by Jenny A. Panopio
22-January-2009 SEARCA BIC Press Release
Micronutrients are considered as “magic wands”
as they are essential to growth, health, and wellness
of all, especially the children and women. However, micronutrients
deficiency is a global problem, contributing to world’s
widespread malnutrition and high rate of children and
women’s mortality. UNICEF and WHO World Food Programme
estimate that more than 2 billion people in the world
are deficient in Vitamin A, Iodine, Iron or Zinc. And
most these people are deficient to more than one of these
micronutrients.
According to Dr. Corazon Barba, nutritionist from the
University of the Philippines Los Banos (UPLB), “Six
out of the eight objectives in the Millenium Development
Goals (MDGs) are related to micronutrient deficiency.
And together with conventional interventions, such as
supplementation and industrial fortification, biofortification
of crops with essential micronutrients could greatly
contribute in the attainment of these MDGs”. Dr.
Barba believes on the potentials of crop biofortification
as one of the long term solutions in combating this
widespread and persistent public health problem. Dr.
Randy Hautea of ISAAA also trusts that biofortification
can help in alleviating global malnutrition.
Crop biofortification is a strategy employed by agricultural
research institutions to utilize genetic modification
(GM) as well as conventional breeding of crops to enhance
levels of essential micronutrient. The potentials and
safety issues of biofortified crops to address micronutrient
deficiencies was the focus of a symposium held last
January 18, 2010 at SEARCA, College, Laguna.
During the symposium, Dr. Gerard Barry, Golden Rice
Network Coordinator of the International Rice Research
Institute (IRRI), shared the current biofortification
initiatives in rice for micronutrients Vitamin A, iron,
and zinc. Of all these efforts, the pro-Vitamin A Golden
rice is considered to be in most advanced stage and
is expected to reach commercial approval in the Philippines
by the Year 2012 or 2013.
Like any other biotech/GM crops, biofortified crops,
such as Golden rice, are assessed for food and environmental
safety prior to commercial release. The Philippines
has set-up policies and regulatory framework that governs
such assessment prior to commercial use.
The symposium was organized by the UPLB Institute of Human
Nutrition and Food in cooperation with the International
Service for the Acquisition of Agri-biotech Applications
(ISAAA), SEARCA
Biotechnology Information Center and the Biotech
Coalition of the Philippines.
For more biotechnology updates in the Philippines, visit
www.bic.agri.searca.org
or email bic@agri.searca.org.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2-ADDRESSING BIOSAFETY CONCERNS: HOW SAFE IS BIOTECHNOLOGY?
by Reynaldo V. Ebora, Carlo G. Custodio and Virginia G. Nevonario – Enriquez
BIOLIFE 2009 Number 2
THE PHILIPPINES established the first functional biosafety
regulation in the developing world as early as 1990 through
Executive Order 430 issued by the President Corazon C.
Aquino. In 2002, the country became the first country
in Asia to commercialize a transgenic crop for food, feed
and processing. At present, the Philippines is the only
Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) country
commercially producing GM crops. ASEAN countries are in
various stages of regulatory development with each country
pursuing its own research and development (R&D) agenda.
However, experience has shown that a functional biosafety
system is a very critical factor in the successful commercial
release of genetically modified (GM) crops; the absence
of clear regulatory mechanism is also one of the stumbling
blocks for the commercialization of GM crops.
Indonesia, for instance, has stopped producing Bacillus
thuringiensis (Bt) cotton since 2001 after commercially
planting it in limited areas in South Sulawesi, partly
due to the absence of a clear regulatory mechanism.
On the other hand, a very strict regulatory system practically
makes adoption of GM technology a big challenge, if
not an impossible one.
Setting up the Philippine biosafety regulatory
system
The Philippines has recognized the potential benefits
of the responsible use of biotechnology from the time
of President Marcos to President Arroyo. The Philippine
government has supported biotech R&D as well as
the establishment of sound biosafety policies.
The National Institute of Biotechnology and Applied
Microbiology [which was later renamed National Institute
of Molecular Biology and Biotechnology (BIOTECH)] was
established in UP Los Baños during the time of
President Marcos. Side-by-side with the support to research
was the establishment and development of biosafety guidelines
to ensure the safe and responsible use of modern biotechnology.
In 1990, President Aquino issued Executive Order 430
instituting the National Committee on Biosafety of the
Philippines (NCBP) that effectively regulates recombinant
DNA research in the country. President Ramos also recognized
modern biotechnology as one of the tools to realize
improvement in crop production under the Agriculture
and Fisheries Modernization Act (AFMA). Similarly, both
Presidents Estrada and Arroyo issued policy statements
affirming that modern biotechnology is an important
tool for agricultural production and food security.
In 2006, President Arroyo also issued Executive Order
514 to further strengthen the NCBP.
Bt corn: Handling the Biosafety issue
The first greenhouse evaluation of Bt corn in the Philippines
was approved in September 1997. This was followed by
field tests conducted in December 1999 to March 2002
under the supervision of the NCBP. Multi-location field
trials were conducted by Monsanto Philippines in July
2001 to May 2002 and Pioneer Hi-Breed Philippines in
June 2002 to July 2003.
With products nearing commercialization, the need for
a set of regulations that would assess both short and
long-term effects on the environment and human health
was realized. The Bureau of Plant Industry (BPI) became
responsible in regulating field tests and monitoring
the eventual commercial propagation of GM crops and
thus practically made adoption of GM technology possible.
In April 2002, the Department of Agriculture (DA), through
then Secretary Leonardo Montemayor, issued Administrative
Order No. 8 – Rules and Regulations for the Importation
and Release into the Environment of Plants and Plant
Products Derived from the Use of Modern Biotechnology.
Bt corn was commercially released in December 2002.
A study by Yorobe et al (2004) showed that while Bt
corn seeds cost twice as much than their conventional
counterparts, farmers realized greater profits. Expenses
related to pesticide use were reduced and yield was
higher compared to conventional corn.
After Bt corn, the Philippines approved next for commercial
release GM herbicide-tolerant corn and GM corn stacked
with both the insect-resistant and herbicide-tolerant
traits. As of June 2009, the total area planted to transgenic
corn is estimated at 1,077,947 hectares, a clear proof
of the high adoption rate of the technology by the corn
farmers.
Coming-more GM crops from the public sector
Currently in the pipeline for commercial release in
the Philippines are GM crops developed by public-sector
research institutes. These are: 1) papaya ringspot virus
(PRSV)-resistant papaya; 2) fruit and shoot borer-resistant
eggplant, and; 3) delayed ripening papaya. These have
been subjected to confined field trials (CFT) where
their agronomic performance was evaluated while subjecting
them to environmental risk assessment. CFT allows field
evaluation without compromising environmental safety.
Also, the experienced gained in handling private-sector
GM crops is used in the field evaluation of GM crops
developed by the public sector. While the Philippines
may not have the most number of ongoing researches in
the developing world, its functional biosafety system
paves the way for the safe and responsible evaluation
and the eventual use of GM crops developed by both the
private and public sectors.
Now in operation, Philippine Biosafety Clearing
House (BCH Pilipinas)
One of the main features of the Philippine biosafety
regulatory system is transparency, i.e., decisions made
related to GM crops are transparent, with due consideration
to crucial confidential business information. In 2008,
the Philippines established the web-based BCH Pilipinas
(http://bch.dost.gov.ph/system/), in compliance to the
country’s membership in the Cartagena Protocol
on Biosafety.
BCH Pilipinas basically makes biotechnology and biosafety
information at the public’s fingertips. BCH Pilipinas
is made possible through the collaborative efforts of
the following government departments as Competent National
Authorities: Departments of Science and Technology (DOST),
Agriculture (DA), Health (DOH) and Environment and Natural
Resources (DENR). Information on risk assessment, transformation
events for food, feed and processing approved by the
government for importation as well as biosafety-related
trainings, seminars and workshops can be obtained from
BCH Pilipinas, which are regularly updated.
Lessons Learned and Challenges
One of the lessons learned in the commercialization
of transgenic crops in the Philippines is the importance
of having a transparent and predictable regulatory system
that facilitates compliance by the technology developers,
as well as builds public trust and confidence in the
regulatory process.
Public participation is also key to biosafety decision-making.
In the Philippines system, public participation is provided
for through the community representatives in the Institutional
Biosafety Committees (IBCs) who are directly involved
in the evaluation of biosafety applications. Any biosafety
application cannot be acted upon by higher authorities
unless it is favorably endorsed by the IBC, thus allowing
direct participation of the public in the decision-making
process, aside from giving them the opportunity to comment
on the proposed field trails.
Like any other biological based system, biosafety regulations
are not static and, in fact, are continuously evolving
due to the development of new biotechnology products
and the discovery of new knowledge associated with emerging
technologies. It is therefore imperative that capacity-building
of personnel involved in biosafety evaluation be constantly
pursued in order to have a system responsive to the
current technical and communication needs.
Sustained information, education and communication
(IEC) campaign is essential so that the public is informed
with the current biotechnology-related developments.
Although debates on the pros and cons of transgenic
technology are not expected to totally go away, the
success of the technology can be partly measured in
its safe and sustainable use, and its adoption by the
consumers and the general public. Like any other new
technology, a positive public perception is a must for
the successful adoption of biotechnology in the country.
Fortunately, current studies have shown that Filipinos
generally viewed biotechnology positively.
The way forward
Considering the accomplishment of the Philippines in
biotechnology R&D and the gains obtained from the
adoption and actual utilization of GN technologies,
particularly in agriculture, it is logical for both
private and public sectors to sustain their current
efforts to mainstream the use of biotechnology in the
production system while taking biosafety aspects into
full consideration. Indeed, biosafety is like a twin
of biotechnology; it is an essential component for biotechnology
to be successfully adopted by the public.
Dr. Reynaldo V. Ebora, is the Executive Director of the
Philippine Council for Advanced Science and Technology
Research and Development. Dr. Virginia G. Novenario-Enriquez
is the Research Information and Utilization Division (RIUD)
Chief of the Philippine Council for Advanced Science and
Technology Research and Development (PCASTRD). Mr. Carlo
G. Custodio, is from the Program for Biosafety System
(PBS) Southeast Asia.
bic@searcaweb.org.
|
|
|
|
|
|
