M.S. Swaminathan ~ Full interview

UNESCO Chairman in Ecotechnology at the M.S. Swaminathan Research Foundation in Chennai, India and Chairman of the National Commission on Agriculture, Food and Nutrition Security of India

1.  In your view, what are the most urgent problems in the field of food?

There are many developments in the field of food. The most important is the rising cost of food (like grain and corn). This is due to the rise of biofuels and the increasing competition between fuel and food. This has become a very important cause of debate.

The second important area is climate change. The change in temperature results in changing rain fall patterns, the melting of glaciers and the rise of sea levels in coastal areas. This has a potential impact on the production of basic food grains. These areas are related, because energy costs have gone up and as a result farmers are attracted to the production of biofuels. They use land not for food production but for fuel crops production. All this leads to issues on food security.

The third problem I would like to mention is that of transboundary pests. The world is becoming a global community. Aircraft are going around the world, birds and people are migrating, taking diseases along with them; avian influenza, pests and diseases.

These are the triple major challenges of today.

2.  In your view, what solutions may be involved? Why?

We should not change the use of dry farm land from food crops to fuel crops. We should use agricultural biomass that is cellulosic material to produce biofuels, methanol etc., because the human body cannot digest cellulose. Non-cellulosic material we can convert to biogas.

We should also invest more in renewable energies like solar, wind, wave motion and thermal energy. We can use solar energy much more widely and effectively. We should use photosynthetic pathways of development more for food and nutrition security, not for fuels. For energy security we should develop an energy mix, involving solar, wind energy, biomass and biogas.

In the area of global warming and climate change we have to prepare ourselves to meet three different kinds of situations. Temperature increase (more transpiration and evaporation), more water because of frequent floods, melting snow and heavy rainfall and more drought.

3.  What are the necessary conditions for successful solutions?

We need careful action-reaction analyses to get a better view on how to minimise risks and maximise benefits of biotechnology. Information on these topics should not be put under the carpet. Furthermore, we have to accept that some results and risks cannot be predicted.

We should also invest more in renewable energies like solar, wind, wave motion and thermal energy. We can use solar energy much more widely and effectively. We should use photosynthetic pathways of development more for food and nutrition security, not for fuels. For energy security we should develop an energy mix, involving solar, wind energy, biomass and biogas.

Scientist should look at the risks and benefits in an objective manner. The moral responsibility of the scientists and the consequences of their work have enormously increased. Bio-ethics should be a compulsory topic at today’s schools.

4.  Are there any biotechnological solutions for these problems (from question 2)? What biotechnology solutions are already available and what solutions may be available in the future? Is there a difference between genetic modification and other biotechnological techniques?

I can give you three examples how we can enlarge coping capacity with research.

1.  Climate change results in drought: moisture stress because of higher temperature and lack of rainfall. We must therefore develop less water demanding plants. By shifting crops, for instance by growing sorghum, which is more tolerant to high temperature and less water, these new circumstances can be tackled. There are also a lot of old forgotten crops that require much less water than the crops we use today. We should use these natural variations in nature to breed new crops.

2.  Biotechnology can offer new ways to address climate change. Drought tolerance can be built into crops, for instance rice, by transferring genes.

3.  To cope with sea level rise we can take genes from mangroves that are tolerant to salt. Furthermore we have to develop bio-shields. Just as the dikes provide physical shields, bio-shields are natural barriers to rising sea levels, like mangroves and halophytic plants.

If we combine traditional and modern technologies (like GM and marker assisted selection), combine molecular and Mendelian breeding, we can open new opportunities. Within the research programme we should anticipate the crops we need and the genes we want to transfer. We have to find the best fitting solution for each problem.

Floods can be addressed by exploiting floating rice. These plants are able to accommodate changing water levels. Nature provides for everybody’s needs, not for everbody’s greed”, said Mahatma Ghandi.

Rice is going to be the saviour for humanity in the context of climate change. This crop is well equipped for changing climate conditions, like change in latitude, altitude and temperature. There are more than 100.000 different varieties in a gene bank. This makes rice applicable in almost every circumstance.

The solution for tackling transboundary pests is to build a global village with international screening facilities for identifying genes. Biotechnology is very important here, because we do not know about resistance. People are killing the birds and cows to prevent the spreading of the disease. There are a lot of local varieties, I’m sure some are resistant to infections. I would suggest to execute experiments in quarantine remote islands off the coast of India in order to select useful varieties. Killing the animals is not the answer. Transboundary pests should be monitored and can be better stopped that way.

5.  In your view, which developments/solutions (from questions 1, 2 and 3) will lead to public debate? Where do you expect controversy? How should we deal with controversies?

There is a lot of fear, especially with non-governmental movements in Europe. We should trust the scientist with considering the risks and benefits, although we cannot predict everything. The food versus fuel debate will go on for some time.

6.  What are the differences between developing and developed countries (in terms of both problems and opportunities)?

I have discussed general problems that apply for all countries.

7.  In your view, what will the field of food look like in 20 years time?

If we are all wise today and we have international co-operation, we will see what we call sustainable food security. Food for all and forever, in an environmentally friendly and socially sustainable basis: the evergreen revolution. I call it an ‘evergreen’ revolution, because ‘green’ revolution is criticised for its potential environmental and economical difficulties. ‘Evergreen’ is defined as productivity in prosperity without ecological or social harm.

In 20 years there will be more international co-operation and a sustainable agriculture. Also, the knowledge on vanished crops will come back resulting in a spectrum of crops to choose from.

The interaction between biodiversity, biotechnology and business, if it is used safely, should lead to an era of biohappiness.

8.  Which statement/question/dilemma would you like to put to the readers of this interview? (We would like to use this statement/question/dilemma for the internet discussion.)

A major dilemma is: there is less and less dialogue and there are more and more opinions. We do not require confrontation, but consensus. We all want food for all and forever, but how do we achieve it? Going back to the past is no option: we should not glamorise the past and shouldn’t run down the future. We must blend the tools of traditional wisdom and modern science, this will lead to an era of biohappiness.