Mr MS Swaminathan is one of the architects of India’s green revolution in the sixties, which transformed the nation from a food scarcity to nation of food surplus and even an exporter. Winner almost all the top prizes in the world, Dr Swaminathan has not rested on its laurels. The MS Swaminathan Research Foundation(MSSRF), which he runs in Chennai for the last decade is a leading institution advocating maintenance of national food security through adoption of modern technologies, including biotechnology on an equitable basis.  As the nation leapfrogs in to the modern technological world, Dr Swaminathan’s sane voice has been calling a national consensus on biotechnology. From all public forums, including the latest edition of the Indian Science Congress held in early January, Dr Swaminathan has strongly recommended the need to formulate a National Biotechnology Policy on the lines of the national policies on sensitive areas like space, atomic energy and information technology. Because, national consensus in these sectors have done wonders to make India a leading global player in these areas.  Dr Swaminathan visualizes India making similar strides in biotechnology. As part of the informal nationwide consultation process, Dr Swaminthan recently organized a meeting of over 50 leading experts at the MSSRF in Chennai to discuss the issues confronting the biotechnology sector thread bare. We present here the Chennai Declaration, prepared under Dr Swaminathan’s guidance, which reiterates the urgent need for a National Biotechnology Policy.

‘It’s time to have a National Biotech Policy’

The country has well defined policies in the fields of atomic energy, space applications and information technology. No further time should be lost in developing a national food and agricultural biotechnology policy through political consensus.
Otherwise India will experience serious genetic divide. A similar policy is also needed in the area of medical biotechnology, which involves ethical issues with reference to both human and animal experiments. 

The urgency stems from the fact that the twenty-first century will belong to those who help to advance the frontiers of science and technology in the areas of functional genomics, proteomics, bioinformatics and molecular breeding (ie, genetic modification). 

Scientific leap-frogging in both the theoretical and applied aspects of the new genetics will take place mostly in industrialized countries. China is fast becoming a developed country in respect of achieving mastery of techniques relating to genomics and recombinant DNA technology for improving human nutrition and health. 

Equally important is to formulate a well-defined implementation plan for the national food and agriculture biotechnology policy. Because any policy without an appropriate and effective implementation framework will have no value. Therefore, the policy should provide the terms of reference to an autonomous and professional Biotechnology Regulatory and Advancement Commission. 

The aim of regulation should be to help in harnessing this powerful technology in a risk free and responsible manner. The Commission should not only develop and enforce a code on “don’ts”, but should also propose “dos”, which will help to gain benefits without risks. It should build on the Cartagena international protocol on biosafety and introduce a system of regulation and monitoring which inspires public, political and media confidence. 

The term, “biotechnology” encompasses a wide range of technologies- both traditional and frontier. For example, the production and use of biofertilizers, biopesticides, vermi-culture, and bioremediation agents are essential for fostering ecologically sustainable farming methods. Bioprocessing and bioprospecting offer new opportunities for skilled jobs and livelihoods. These areas of biotechnology also offer scope for decentralized village level enterprises operated by self-help groups.

Regulation for the responsible advancement of biotechnology for public good should be the motto. The National
Biotechnology Regulatory and Advancement Commission, which could be attached to the Ministry of Agriculture for administrative purposes, should be headed by an eminent professional known for objectivity and credibility. 

There should be a multi-stakeholder representation on the Commission and its standing Committees, including
scientists, concerned government officials, representatives of public and private sector industry, consumer and women’s associations, farmers’ associations and the mass media. Such a Commission will be effective only if it is created on the basis of consensus among political parties.

The following could be some of the important responsibilities of the Commission:

• Create the expertise and infrastructure needed to undertake a critical and transparent scientific assessment of the food and environmental safety of Genetically Modified (GM) crops.
  
•  Coordinate the work of the Ministries of Agriculture, Health, Environment and Science and Technology, Departmentof Biotechnology(DBT) in the area of biosafety assessment.
•  Provide guidelines for research collaboration between public and private sectors in areas such as functional genomics, proteomics and bioinformatics as well for priorities in public investment, as for example research on drought tolerance, water use efficiency and salinity assistance.
• Assist in fostering linkages among biodiversity-biotechnology biosafety management, conservation of habitats rich in agro-biodiversity should receive special attention
• Monitor the role of the biotechnology industry in assisting the effective implementations of the Protection of Plant Varieties and Farmers’ Rights Act and the Biodiversity Act.
• Help to upgrade patent offices and develop expertise in dealing with issues connected with the Trade Related Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS) regime of World Trade Organization (WTO). 
• Promote regional and international biosafety collaboration, particularly among South Asian Association for Regional Co-operation (SAARC) and Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) countries.
• Serve as a single window regulatory and monitoring agency and develop and introduce a time bound regulatory process.
• Help to create public awareness and understanding on issues relating to biosafety and biotechnology in local 
  languages and vernacular media.
• The Commission should submit an annual report to parliament on the state of Food and Agricultural Biotechnology in India.

Building National Capacity

To build the national capacity in all areas of risk assessment and biosafety valuation and monitoring, it will be useful to set up a National Research Center for the safe and responsible use of GM crops. 

Such a National Research Center could provide the scientific and technical support needed by the proposed National Biotechnology Regulatory and Advancement Commission. 

The center should maintain a global database on biosafety assessment procedures and legislation. It should
undertake training, capacity building and networking in the field of biosafety evaluation. Ultimately, considerations of human health and environmental safety should be the bottom line in risk assessment.

The policy has to deal with the apprehensions relating to molecular genetics and genetic engineering in many broad categories.

• Issues relating to science itself, such as its ethical implications and the problems associated with the antibiotic markers used, etc.
• Issues relating to the control of science such as the probability of the control of global food security falling into the hands of a few transnational corporations.
• Issues relating to access, such as the implications of IPR for the poor, technologies becoming more exclusive than inclusive leading to a further expansion of the rich-poor divide in terms of technological empowerment.
• Issues relating to the environment, such as impact on biodiversity, possibility of “genetic pollution” in the centers of origin and diversity of crop plants emergence of super weeds. 

Finally, issues relating to human and animal health and food safety and allergenicity, which are extremely important in the case of food, feed and fodder plants.

Of the above, the ethical issues assume greater importance in medical biotechnology in areas such as human cloning. A disaggregated approach to the study of the above issues will be important for a rigorous analysis of risks and benefits.
If a disaggregated approach is not used to analyze the issues involved, the conclusions arrived at in international meetings will tend to deal with them in a composite manner as will be clear from the following statement made by NGO and civil society organization at the World Food Summit meeting held in Rome in 2002. “GM Organisms represent a threat to family farmers, other food producers, the integrity of genetic resources and human and environmental health. They will affect particularly the rural poor, who cannot afford this costly alternative”

The benefits of molecular breeding techniques like the use of molecular markers and undertaking precision breeding for specific characters through recombinant DNA technology are immense. The work already done in India has revealed the immense potential for breeding new GM varieties possessing tolerance to salinity, drought, some major pests and diseases and improved nutritive quality. A new era of Integrated Mendelian and Molecular Breeding has begun.

This is the only way we can face the challenges of the future, particularly in the context of the growing water scarcity as well as the urgent need to step up productivity in semi-arid and dry farming areas. Denying ourselves the power of the new genetics will be doing great disservice to both resource poor farming families and to the building of a sustainable national food and nutrition security system. Food self-sufficiency is essential for preserving our national sovereignty in foreign policy. 

Next Page : Bio-Active States