How many genetically modified crops have been cleared for commercial use in India?

Since the first GM seed, Mahyco-Monsanto’s Bollgard Cotton, the Government has approved 59 GM hybrids (all cotton) for commercial release. Of these, 52 are based on the Bollgard gene technology of Monsanto, while the others are different gene constructs developed by JK Agri-Genetics Ltd or Nath Seeds.

What is the regulatory structure for GM crops in India today?

India currently has a three-tier regulatory system for GM crops: each research organisation must have an Institutional Biosafety Committee (IBSA), which assesses research proposals; a national Review Committee on Genetic Manipulation (RCGM) assesses field trials for environmental safety and allergic responses; and the Genetic Engineering Approval Committee (GEAC) — part of the environment ministry — carries out environmental impact assessment, and approves multi-location field trials and commercial cultivation.

What’s the problem with the present system?

Several, including a clash of interests between stakeholders and regulators, not enough experts to assess health and environmental safety of the crops and inordinate time taken for clearance. A scientist from the agricultural research system that applies for clearance of a particular seed is part of the GEAC, whose chairman is not a scientist and changes frequently. There is lack of transparency — the Bt cotton field trial results were never made public — despite protests. After pressure from civil society, Bt brinjal results have been put on the website this year.

What are the reforms suggested in the regulatory system?

A task force headed by M. S. Swaminathan, said that India’s approval system was “lengthy and cumbersome” . It recommends creating an autonomous Agricultural Biotechnology Regulatory Authority to consider the approval of GM crops in the country. Under this body, the Indian Council for Agricultural Research (ICAR), not the GEAC, should be authorised to conduct and assess large-scale field trials and approve commercial release of GM crops. He also suggested that the three tiers remain but their responsibilities change.

The major change that they recommend is to limit GEAC’s role to environmental clearance. The ICAR, rather than the GEAC, would decide whether GM crops could be planted for commercial purposes. The Monitoring cum Evaluation Committee should report to the GEAC on biosafety and environmental issues while post-release monitoring should be responsibility of Union Agriculture ministry and not the ICAR. It favours strengthening of the existing Seeds Act, 1966 and Environmental Protection Act 1986 to deal with illegal proliferation of GM seeds. It proposes single-window information on all aspects of bioethics and biosafety.

What is the roadblock?

Though Swaminathan submitted his report in 2004, its formation is stuck as a result of a power struggle between two ministries — the environment ministry and the department of biotechnology. Both ministries want to control the panel.

What’s coming up ahead?

There is a whole range of crops in the lab trial stage in the private sector. In the public sector, there are seven transgenics which have crossed the RCGM-stage of approvals — American bollworm-resistant cotton, yellow stem borer-resistant rice, fruit and shoot borer-resistant brinjal, leaf curl virus-resistant tomato, protein-enriched potato, and salinity-cum-drought tolerant tomato and mustard. If all goes well, these would be ready for the farmers’ fields by 2008-09.