PETER MCDONALD <\/p>\n
Last updated10:25, March 29 2017 <\/p>\n
TIM CRONSHAW\/FAIRFAX NZ <\/p>\n
Genetically engineered cows at AgResearch's Animal Containment Facility at the Ruakura Research Centre in 2009. <\/p>\n
There seems to be some big issues appearing on the horizon for New Zealand agriculture. Two of these being our status in regard to Genetic Engineering (GE) and the realisation that on farm animal emissions will need to be addressed in the near future. <\/p>\n
While many may think these are issues to be dealt separately some believe that the two are linked and one may fix the other. <\/p>\n
Is our central government putting too much faith into the premise that potential GE technologies may have a significant impact on reducing animal emissions? <\/p>\n
READ MORE:Big meat processors to face consequences of smaller sheep flock <\/p>\n
We would be foolish to pin all our hopes on technologies that aren't even developed yet.The enormity of the issue regarding \"farm emissions\" will dictate that the methods employed to mitigate will have to be broader. <\/p>\n
My greatest concern however about GE in agriculture as a nation reliant on exports, is how will we be viewed by our customers? Whether these overseas consumers of our products are informed or uniformed it doesn't really matter,what matters is what they believe. To blindly brush aside our consumer's beliefs then move forward with GE without a thorough understanding of potential in market effects would be reckless. <\/p>\n
Could we do long term damage to our exporting base overnight with a \"flick of the GE switch?\" <\/p>\n
Following on, would we then as a country be consigned to the global commodity \"bargain bin\"? <\/p>\n
All the currenttalk is about elevating ourselves out of the commodity mind-set into one of value. If New Zealand wasto embrace GE my question would be, can we then go on to compete with other large producing nations, all wrestling for positions exclusively on price? These countries most likely are closer to large consuming populations and do not have the costs of compliance surrounding employment and environment. <\/p>\n
If we decide to try to take on these competitors on cost, we will fail. The benign introduction of GE technologies into our agricultural systems may well make this decision for us in the value versus volume debate. <\/p>\n
In 1970 one of the greatest people that you may never have heard of wasDr Norman Borlag,described as the father of the \"green revolution\". In his Nobel Laureate lecture on the eve of receiving his prize, he was very clear when he said in regards to global food demand:\"I've only given the world a 30 year breathing space before other technologies must present themselves\". <\/p>\n
He also went on to say:\"For the genetic improvement of food crops to continue at a pace sufficient to meet the needs of humankind in the future both conventional breeding and biotechnology methodologies will be needed\" <\/p>\n
Is GE part of these new technologies Dr Borlag spoke of? Most probably so. <\/p>\n
Does New Zealand need to uptake this technology so as to feed the world? Not necessarily. <\/p>\n
-Stuff <\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
Continue reading here: PETER MCDONALD Last updated10:25, March 29 2017 TIM CRONSHAW\/FAIRFAX NZ Genetically engineered cows at AgResearch's Animal Containment Facility at the Ruakura Research Centre in 2009. Continue reading
\nGenetic engineering could damage export market - Stuff.co.nz<\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"