Biodiversity v GM, or both?
Posted on 27. Oct, 2009 by annied in Kew Gardens, agriculture
A famous song intones, “Never turn your back on Mother Earth.” Nature is both amazingly resilient and also maintains a delicate balance, a balance to which every one of us on this planet owes a great deal of respect. In agriculture there are two simultaneously convergent and divergent strains of thought about the future for Mother Earth:
The climate is changing, and places that were once resource rich (water, nutrients in the soil) may become resource poor. Certain climates will no longer be able to support the same level of agricultural output so we need to engineer the same, traditional crops to survive in the new environment.
Another argument goes: biodiversity makes it possible to grow certain crops in areas where you couldn’t otherwise because of nutrients added/retained in the soil if you grow other plants in combination with them. But if biodiversity is decreasing due to climate change, then genetically modifying crops, even combinations of crops, should help the problem, no?
What if we used older, more resilient plants and traditional farming techniques (example: terracing) in combination with GM crops (visit CYMMT to learn more)? Thus, the problem.
From The Bigger Picture: Festival of Interdependence on Saturday last, Colin Tudge (author Feeding People is Easy) explains how important something like Kew’s Millennium Seed Bank Project is:
Click to hear Tudge on the Millenium Seed Project
A previous blog addressed the checkered history of GM crops (and the power of the GM lobby), both on soils and on our health. [Click here to hear Tudge explain the market gaps and nature of modern agricultural production that allows agribusiness and the GM lobby to flourish.] But until the debate about how we will change the way we feed ourselves, we need to prepare for both options.
Click here to see how Kew is preserving our biodiversity and securing our future.
Want to help? Adopt a Seed!