Asipulo Rice Terraces
When I arrived at the International Rice and Research Institute, (I.R.R.I.), I met with the visitor coordinator to figure out who I should interview during my time there. The coordinator mentioned several people, two of whom really intrigued me: a man who used to work with Greenpeace, and another who recently worked for Monsanto—one of the largest genetic engineering and pesticide producing companies in the world. I requested to speak with both of them. I thought their different backgrounds and perspectives would prove interesting.
I meet first with Marco Van Den Berg, the head of Information Technology Services at I.R.R.I.
“Would you like to speak inside or outside?” he asks as we shake hands. I’m not short, but Marco towers over me—a tall, built, man from the Netherlands with a deep voice and an accent that I struggle not to adopt. He leads me outside and we walk along the well manicured I.R.R.I. grounds and settled in a nipa hut.
I ask Marco a bit about his history with Greenpeace. He tells me that he worked there as an internet technician. However, though he agreed with many of their principles, he emphasized that he did not agree with all of them. Now at I.R.R.I., he helps create systems that record rice “parental” information and their performance records. When I.R.R.I. scientists research a certain kind of rice variety, they detail information about it: how it responds to high stress, cold, bad weather, etc. This helps researchers match parent varieties with other ones to create hybrids, or even just an original variety with a trait of another—such as an ability to grow in salty soil, for example. His branch of I.R.R.I. creates technologies that make this information available to the public.
“All of our products are licensed under the Creative Commons license,” he says, “We don’t sell any of our products for commercial purposes.” He continues, “Profit is not a dirty word, it’s just that we’re focused on making sure the farmer can make a decent living and we get grants from outside resources to do so.”
He explains that I.R.R.I. gives their products to national organizations like PhilRice, which sells rice to farmers in the Philippines. PhilRice researches what varieties or traits farmers need, communicates that to I.R.R.I., and then I.R.R.I. makes the variety and gives it to PhilRice who in turn gets it to the farmers. That’s the simple version of the process—and it happens all over the world, not just here in the Philippines.
Yet, it’s not just I.R.R.I. that interests me—I’m curious about Marco’s background with Greenpeace and how it plays out here at an organization that uses genetic engineering.
Here we get into trickier waters. Marco explains that the definition for genetic engineering differs, depending on who you talk to.
“Cloning is not genetic engineering,” he says, “though it’s considered genetic engineering by Greenpeace. I don’t agree with human cloning,” he says, “but we often clone rice species here for research; it’s considered non-traditional reproduction.”
I.R.R.I. also does what’s called, “application of genetic markers.” Essentially it’s when researchers take two existing rice varieties and apply a genetic trait from one to the other. For example, they might take a popular rice variety like jasmine rice and add a trait from a wild rice such as a resistance to a certain mold, or an ability to grow a thick stock so the rice won’t blow over so easily in the wind.
“You’re not introducing a new plant species,” he points out. “You keep one species and add traits of another. It’s what plant breeders have been doing for years,” he says, “We’re just accelerating the breeding process.”
Marco adds that I.R.R.I. is extremely careful: they follow a strict set of procedures and rules and spend large amounts of money to make sure the research is done correctly, with respect to the environment. Unfortunately, they’re still not entirely sure about the implications to the environment that their research might entail.
I bring up organic farming and its popularity in the U.S.
“The approach to organic food is elitist,” Marco says, “If we were to globally switch to organic food, the total food production would decline. It’s great to advocate for places like Whole Foods, but (Westerners) have a choice—their income is totally incomparable (to people in developing countries). We’re talking about people that can hardly afford rice, let alone organic vegetables.
“Greenpeace advocates sustainable agriculture, but sustainability means you reach a level where you can sustain everyone first—we haven’t done that yet. We may very well have surpassed the population level with which we can sustain the population on traditional varieties alone.”
“The Green Revolution,” he continues, “averted some horrific famines, which people often forget in controversy about the rice varieties and pesticides that were developed during that time too.”
“It sounds like over population is a huge part of the problem,” I say. Then I joke, “Maybe they could put birth control pills in the rice.”
He laughs. “Of course, population is a big part of the issue, and it wouldn’t be that hard to make a rice variety like that. But that’s not where I.R.R.I. gets involved. Our mission is to feed people and get them out of poverty—we’re not going to engage the debate about family size. Countries can do that for themselves.”
“But isn’t there the possibility that the rice can cross pollinate,” I asked, “and contaminate other species?”
“Rice typically self pollinates, like wheat. But it’s not 100% certain—chance cross pollinations over history created some of the varieties we eat now. So, we know there is a chance that our genetically modified varieties might cross pollinate. We try to avoid that as much as possible, but there’s still that risk.
“But, feeding the people is urgent. I’m not willing to allow major famines or a major loss of life because there’s a slight possibility for cross pollination. Rice is the center of life in Asia—and most Westerners have a hard time understanding that.”
He continued, “I’ve met some real right wingers in Greenpeace too—people who are against any kind of genetic engineering. It’s like that life boat theory. If there are too many people in the lifeboat, who do you kick out? What do we do, leave only white people in the boat?”
When I arrived at the International Rice and Research Institute, (I.R.R.I.), I met with the visitor coordinator to figure out who I should interview during my time there. The coordinator mentioned several people, two of whom really intrigued me: a man who used to work with Greenpeace, and another who recently worked for Monsanto—one of the largest genetic engineering and pesticide producing companies in the world. I requested to speak with both of them. I thought their different backgrounds and perspectives would prove interesting.
I meet first with Marco Van Den Berg, the head of Information Technology Services at I.R.R.I.
“Would you like to speak inside or outside?” he asks as we shake hands. I’m not short, but Marco towers over me—a tall, built, man from the Netherlands with a deep voice and an accent that I struggle not to adopt. He leads me outside and we walk along the well manicured I.R.R.I. grounds and settled in a nipa hut.
I ask Marco a bit about his history with Greenpeace. He tells me that he worked there as an internet technician. However, though he agreed with many of their principles, he emphasized that he did not agree with all of them. Now at I.R.R.I., he helps create systems that record rice “parental” information and their performance records. When I.R.R.I. scientists research a certain kind of rice variety, they detail information about it: how it responds to high stress, cold, bad weather, etc. This helps researchers match parent varieties with other ones to create hybrids, or even just an original variety with a trait of another—such as an ability to grow in salty soil, for example. His branch of I.R.R.I. creates technologies that make this information available to the public.
“All of our products are licensed under the Creative Commons license,” he says, “We don’t sell any of our products for commercial purposes.” He continues, “Profit is not a dirty word, it’s just that we’re focused on making sure the farmer can make a decent living and we get grants from outside resources to do so.”
He explains that I.R.R.I. gives their products to national organizations like PhilRice, which sells rice to farmers in the Philippines. PhilRice researches what varieties or traits farmers need, communicates that to I.R.R.I., and then I.R.R.I. makes the variety and gives it to PhilRice who in turn gets it to the farmers. That’s the simple version of the process—and it happens all over the world, not just here in the Philippines.
Yet, it’s not just I.R.R.I. that interests me—I’m curious about Marco’s background with Greenpeace and how it plays out here at an organization that uses genetic engineering.
Here we get into trickier waters. Marco explains that the definition for genetic engineering differs, depending on who you talk to.
“Cloning is not genetic engineering,” he says, “though it’s considered genetic engineering by Greenpeace. I don’t agree with human cloning,” he says, “but we often clone rice species here for research; it’s considered non-traditional reproduction.”
I.R.R.I. also does what’s called, “application of genetic markers.” Essentially it’s when researchers take two existing rice varieties and apply a genetic trait from one to the other. For example, they might take a popular rice variety like jasmine rice and add a trait from a wild rice such as a resistance to a certain mold, or an ability to grow a thick stock so the rice won’t blow over so easily in the wind.
“You’re not introducing a new plant species,” he points out. “You keep one species and add traits of another. It’s what plant breeders have been doing for years,” he says, “We’re just accelerating the breeding process.”
Marco adds that I.R.R.I. is extremely careful: they follow a strict set of procedures and rules and spend large amounts of money to make sure the research is done correctly, with respect to the environment. Unfortunately, they’re still not entirely sure about the implications to the environment that their research might entail.
I bring up organic farming and its popularity in the U.S.
“The approach to organic food is elitist,” Marco says, “If we were to globally switch to organic food, the total food production would decline. It’s great to advocate for places like Whole Foods, but (Westerners) have a choice—their income is totally incomparable (to people in developing countries). We’re talking about people that can hardly afford rice, let alone organic vegetables.
“Greenpeace advocates sustainable agriculture, but sustainability means you reach a level where you can sustain everyone first—we haven’t done that yet. We may very well have surpassed the population level with which we can sustain the population on traditional varieties alone.”
“The Green Revolution,” he continues, “averted some horrific famines, which people often forget in controversy about the rice varieties and pesticides that were developed during that time too.”
“It sounds like over population is a huge part of the problem,” I say. Then I joke, “Maybe they could put birth control pills in the rice.”
He laughs. “Of course, population is a big part of the issue, and it wouldn’t be that hard to make a rice variety like that. But that’s not where I.R.R.I. gets involved. Our mission is to feed people and get them out of poverty—we’re not going to engage the debate about family size. Countries can do that for themselves.”
“But isn’t there the possibility that the rice can cross pollinate,” I asked, “and contaminate other species?”
“Rice typically self pollinates, like wheat. But it’s not 100% certain—chance cross pollinations over history created some of the varieties we eat now. So, we know there is a chance that our genetically modified varieties might cross pollinate. We try to avoid that as much as possible, but there’s still that risk.
“But, feeding the people is urgent. I’m not willing to allow major famines or a major loss of life because there’s a slight possibility for cross pollination. Rice is the center of life in Asia—and most Westerners have a hard time understanding that.”
He continued, “I’ve met some real right wingers in Greenpeace too—people who are against any kind of genetic engineering. It’s like that life boat theory. If there are too many people in the lifeboat, who do you kick out? What do we do, leave only white people in the boat?”
No comments:
Post a Comment