Don't Worry, GE Labeling Will Not Cause World Hunger | Civil Eats STAGING

Don’t Worry, GE Labeling Will Not Cause World Hunger

The movement to label genetically engineered (GE) foods in the U.S. is gaining momentum by the day. Just this week, a federal bill to require labeling of GE foods was introduced in Washington D.C. with strong bipartisan support —including that of over 30 Congressional co-sponsors from House and Senate. And more states have introduced GE labeling bills this year than ever before. Whether or not these initiatives pass in 2013, this much seems clear: we will win labeling of GE foods. It’s just a matter of time.

Unlock the Full Story with a Civil Eats Membership

Expand your understanding of food systems as a Civil Eats member. Enjoy unlimited access to our groundbreaking reporting, engage with experts, and connect with a community of changemakers.

Join today

Naturally, the pesticide and biotech industry players have come out swinging with a host of dire but false predictions that food prices will rise and the sky will fall if people are allowed to know what’s in our food. The latest evidence of desperation comes from a long-time GE apologist, who now claims that labeling GE foods in the U.S. will exacerbate world hunger and poverty. Seriously?

GE’s broken promises

When I got to the end of Robert Paarlberg’s latest pro-GE article in the Wall Street Journal — where he makes the acrobatic leap from labeling GE foods in the U.S. to world hunger — I literally shook my head and said, “Really, Rob?” My tone mirrored that of my 12 year old when he says, “Really, Mom?” if I make a particularly inane or utterly ridiculous (to his mind) comment.

Paarlberg’s reasoning is pretty opaque, but it seems to go like this: if we adopt GE labeling here, then developing country governments (he hypothesizes) would follow our lead, enthusiasm for importing our GE seeds would drop, and (here’s the leap) therefore people will go hungry.

A few quick points to set the record straight:

banner showing a radar tracking screen and the words
  • No one is waiting for U.S. leadership in labeling. Already 3 billion people in 64 countries have labeling, including numerous countries across Africa, Asia and Latin America. The U.S. is actually a latecomer to GE labeling.
  • GE crops do not feed the world’s hungry. Instead, evidence shows us they have continually failed to deliver on industry’s promises of increasing yields, improving nutrition or enabling farmers to weather drought.
  • Rather, GE crops fuel the growth engine of the pesticide industry, with virtually 100 percent of GE seeds on the market today designed to either contain an insecticide or to be used with herbicides. This has led to a massive increase in herbicide use and an epidemic of herbicide-resistant “superweeds.”

Food democracy not GE dependency

Paarlberg claims that “the world needs genetically engineered foods.” It would be more accurate to say that the world’s pesticide companies need GE products. That’s why they created them. But the drivers of, and solutions to, world hunger are rather more complex than industry advocates like to acknowledge.

The reality is that people are often hungry because they are poor and cannot — for a variety of political, social and economic reasons — afford the price of food. In addition to establishing equitable economic and trade policies, real solutions to world hunger will arise out of investing in locally appropriate ecological farming practices that integrate grassroots science and farmers’ knowledge — practices that are productive, resilient and profitable.

Indeed, the weight of scientific evidence supports a global shift towards ecological farming. Numerous UN and independent academic reports have concluded that meeting the climate, water, energy and food challenges of the 21st century can be achieved by investing in agroecology. In contrast, the data show, GE technologies are unlikely to get us where we need to go.

Additionally, agroecological farming can double food production, save our soil, protect biodiversity, reduce dependence on fossil fuels and help farmers adapt to climate change. And organic farming and reliance on traditional seed systems are among the best options available for achieving food security across Africa.

Along with millions of others around the globe — family farmers, rural community leaders, sustainable development experts and scientists — I would argue that what the world actually needs is food democracy. We need ordinary people taking charge of our food systems, getting together to establish the rules, and develop and share creative farming practices. This will enable us to grow and distribute food sustainably, support the livelihoods and protect the health of current and future generations, and safeguard the soil, water and wildlife on which we all depend.

We’ll bring the news to you.

Get the weekly Civil Eats newsletter, delivered to your inbox.

 

Support Civil Eats during NewsMatch

Stories change how we see food — and how we act on it.

From farmworkers to policymakers, Civil Eats lifts up the people building a better food system.

Your gift this season will be doubled through NewsMatch, fueling independent journalism that’s hopeful, honest, and free for all.

Together, we can keep these stories alive — and keep the movement growing.

Give Today.

Civil Eats Supporting Membership $60/year $6/month
Give One, Get One Membership $100/year
Learn more about our membership program

Marcia Ishii-Eiteman is Senior Scientist at Pesticide Action Network North America. Her current work includes policy advocacy in support of a fair, clean and green food system and conducting public campaigns to counter corporate power in food and farming. Before joining PAN in 1996, she worked in rural development in Asia and Africa for 14 years. She holds a PhD in Ecology from Cornell University and was a lead author of the UN-sponsored International Assessment of Agricultural Knowledge, Science and Technology for Development. Read more >

Like the story?
Join the conversation.


Warning: Undefined variable $aria_req in /srv/users/civileats/apps/civileats/public/wp-content/themes/CivilEats/comments.php on line 16

Warning: Undefined variable $aria_req in /srv/users/civileats/apps/civileats/public/wp-content/themes/CivilEats/comments.php on line 21
  1. Miloui
    As horrific as GE and GMO foods are. We were only asking for truth in labeling when this started. Monsanto spent $1.4 million lobbying Washington -- and spent about $6.3 million total last year to fight simple label requirements.

More from

GMOs

Featured

Paulina Velasco from the Institute for Nonprofit News moderated a discussion with Brian Calvert, senior editor, Lisa Held, senior staff reporter and contributing editor, and Matt Wheeland, operations director.

Inside the Food Policy Tracker

At our latest Civil Eats virtual salon, our team talked about the launch and evolution of the Tracker, a running report on federal actions that affect food and agriculture.

Popular

Lorem Ipsum Post

EPA Hires Farm and Pesticide Lobbyist to Oversee Pesticide Regulation

A logo showing the Civil Eats Food Policy Tracker, looking like a radar following food policy proposals and actions

Can This Baltimore Academy Continue to Train Urban Farmers?

Denzel Mitchell at Black Butterfly Teaching Farm. (Photo credit: Sam Delgado)

EPA Funds Projects to Help Farmers Reduce Runoff Into the Great Lakes

A logo showing the Civil Eats Food Policy Tracker, looking like a radar following food policy proposals and actions