Current Science

Open Access Open Access  Restricted Access Subscription Access

Modern Technologies for Sustainable Food and Nutrition Security


Affiliations
1 M.S. Swaminathan Research Foundation, Third Cross Street, Institutional Area, Taramani, Chennai 600 113, India
 

In the hierarchy of human needs, food is absolutely the most basic. As the human population was increasing at an accelerated rate with concomitant depletion of natural resources during the 18th century, Malthus was greatly concerned about the sustainability of food availability. Despite the fact that the human population has been burgeoning, a total collapse in food supply has not yet happened. This is because of new technologies emerging from time to time to boost agricultural productivity and preventing the onset of the Malthusian scourge. However, none of these technologies, including the Green Revolution of the 1960s, has been truly sustainable largely because of their adverse environmental and social impacts. It is expected that the Evergreen Revolution which eliminates the negative attributes of the Green Revolution would be more sustainable. Critical evaluation of the most modern technology, modern biotechnology, reveals that the Btand herbicide-tolerant-crops are highly unsustainable. In addition to causing environmental harm, these crops exhibit genotoxic effects. The original objective of reducing the need for application of chemical pesticides has also not been realized. There is need for basic research to understand the causes of ‘unintended effects’ associated with genetically engineered crops. It will be prudent to adhere to the recommendations of the Task Force on Agricultural Biotechnology, Government of India (2004) in the development and regulation of genetically engineered crops. These aspects are briefly discussed in this article.

Keywords

Green to Evergreen Revolution, Modern Technologies, Nutrition Security, Sustainable Food.
User
Notifications
Font Size

  • Rockström, J. et al., A safe operating space for humanity. Nature, 2009, 461, 472–475.

  • Carson, R., The Silent Spring, Houghton Miffin Co., Boston, USA, 1962, p. 400.

  • Swaminathan, M. S., The age of algeny, genetic destruction of yield barriers, and agricultural transformation. In Presidential Address, Section of Agricultural Sciences: 55th Indian Science Congress, Part II, Varanasi, 1968, pp. 236–248.

  • Bourne Jr, J. K., The end of plenty; the global food crisis. Natl. Geogr., 2009, 215(6), 26–59.

  • Dhillon, B. S., Kataria, P. and Dhillon, P. K., National food security vis-à-vis sustainability of agriculture in high crop productivity regions. Curr. Sci., 2010, 98(1), 33–36.

  • Swaminathan, M. S., Sustainable Agriculture: Towards an Evergreen Revolution, Konark Publishers Pvt Ltd, Delhi, 1996, p. 232.

  • Swaminathan, M. S., An evergreen revolution. Biologist, 2000, 47(21), 85–89.

  • Sachs, J. D., Foreword to the book From Green to Evergreen Revolution (ed. Swaminathan, M. S.), Academic Foundation, New Delhi, 2010, p. 410.

  • Wilson, E. O., The Future of Life, Vintage Books, London, 2003.

  • Swaminathan, M. S. and Kesavan, P. C., Science for sustainable agriculture to achieve UN SDG Goal 2. Curr. Sci., 2018, 114(8), 1585–1586.

  • Biosafety assurance for GM food crops in India. Policy paper 52, Published by the National Academy of Agricultural Sciences, New Delhi, December 2016.

  • Singh, A., Proceed with caution: the statutory, legal and consumer influence on genetically modified foods in Canada. Can. J. Law Technol., 2005, 4, 181–193.

  • Kranthi, K., Fertilizers gave high yields, Bt-only provided cover, Cotton Statistics and News, 2016–2017, No. 39, 27 December 2016.

  • Gutierrez, A. P., Ponti, L., Herreh, H. R., Baumgartner, J. and Kenmore, P. E., Deconstructing Indian cotton: weather, yields and suicides. Environ. Sci. Europe, 2015, 27–12; doi:1o.1186/s/12302-015-0043-8

  • Komarlingam, M. S., An area-wide approach to pink bollworm management on Bt cotton in India – a dire necessity with community participation. Curr. Sci., 2017, 112(10), 1988–1989.

  • Benbrook, C. M., Impacts of genetically engineered crops on pesticide use in the US – the first sixteen years. Environ. Sci. Europe, 2012, 24, 24; https://doi.org/10.1186/2190-4715-24-24

  • Broderick, N. A., Raffa, K. F. and Handlesman, J., Midgut bacteria required for Bacillus thuringiensis insecticidal activity. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA, 2006, 103(41), 15196–15199.

  • Vázquez-Padrón, R. I. et al., Cry1Ac protoxin from Bacillus thuringiensis sp. kurstaki HD73 binds to surface proteins in the mouse small intestine. Biochem. Biophys. Res. Commun., 2000, 271, 54–58.

  • Paul, V., Guertler, P., Wiedemann, S. and Meyer, H. H. D., Degradation of Cry1Ab protein from genetically modified maize (MON810) in relation to total dietary feed proteins in dairy cow digestion. Transgenic Res., 2010, 19, 683–689.

  • Aries, A. and Leblanc, S., Maternal and fetal exposure to pesticides associated to genetically modified foods in Eastern Townships of Quebec, Canada. Reprod. Toxicol., 2011, 31(4), 1–6; doi:10.1016/j.reprotox.2011.02.004.

  • Gasnier, C., Dumont, C., Benachour, N., Clair, E., Chagnonb, M. C. and Séralini, G. E., Glyphosate-based herbicides are toxic and endocrine disruptors in human cell lines. Toxicology, 2009, 262, 184–191.

  • Bolognesi, C. et al., Genotoxic activity of glyphosate and its technical formulation Roundup. J. Agric. Food Chem., 1997, 45, 1957–1962.

  • Benachour, N. and Seralini, G. E., Glyphosate formulations induce apoptosis and necrosis in human umbilical, embryonic and placental cells. Chem. Res. Toxicol., 2009, 22(1), 97–105; doi:10.1021/tx800218n

  • Antoniou, M., Habib, Howard, C. V., Jennings, R. C., Leifert, C., Nodari, R. O. and Fagan, J., Teratogenic effects of glyphosatebased herbicides: divergence of regulatory decisions from scientific evidence. J. Environ. Anal. Toxicol., 2012, doi:10.4172/21610525.s4-006.

  • Avila-Vazquez, M., Maturano, E., Etchegoyen, A., Difilippo, F. S. and Maclean, B., Association between cancer and environmental exposure to glyphosate. Int. J. Clin. Med., 2017, 8, 73–85.

  • Schubert, D. A., Hidden epidemic. GMO Science, 17 March 2018; https://www.gmoscience.org/a-hidden-epidemic

  • Gilbert, N., A hard look at GM crops. Nature, 2013, 457, 24–26.

  • Heinemann, J. A., Massaro, M., Coray, D. S., Agapito-Tenfen, S. Z. and Wen, J. D., Sustainability and innovation in staple crop production in the US Midwest. Int. J. Agric. Sustain., 2013; http://dx.doi.org/10.1080.14735903.2013.806408

  • Singh, N. et al., Combining ability and heterobeltiosis for yield and yield contributing traits in high quality oil Indian mustard (Brassica juncea) genotypes. Indian J. Agric. Sci., 2015, 85(4), 498–503.

  • Padmanaban, G., Relevance of modern technologies to Indian agriculture. Curr. Sci., 2018, 114(12), 2432–2433.


Abstract Views: 436

PDF Views: 148




  • Modern Technologies for Sustainable Food and Nutrition Security

Abstract Views: 436  |  PDF Views: 148

Authors

P. C. Kesavan
M.S. Swaminathan Research Foundation, Third Cross Street, Institutional Area, Taramani, Chennai 600 113, India
M. S. Swaminathan
M.S. Swaminathan Research Foundation, Third Cross Street, Institutional Area, Taramani, Chennai 600 113, India

Abstract


In the hierarchy of human needs, food is absolutely the most basic. As the human population was increasing at an accelerated rate with concomitant depletion of natural resources during the 18th century, Malthus was greatly concerned about the sustainability of food availability. Despite the fact that the human population has been burgeoning, a total collapse in food supply has not yet happened. This is because of new technologies emerging from time to time to boost agricultural productivity and preventing the onset of the Malthusian scourge. However, none of these technologies, including the Green Revolution of the 1960s, has been truly sustainable largely because of their adverse environmental and social impacts. It is expected that the Evergreen Revolution which eliminates the negative attributes of the Green Revolution would be more sustainable. Critical evaluation of the most modern technology, modern biotechnology, reveals that the Btand herbicide-tolerant-crops are highly unsustainable. In addition to causing environmental harm, these crops exhibit genotoxic effects. The original objective of reducing the need for application of chemical pesticides has also not been realized. There is need for basic research to understand the causes of ‘unintended effects’ associated with genetically engineered crops. It will be prudent to adhere to the recommendations of the Task Force on Agricultural Biotechnology, Government of India (2004) in the development and regulation of genetically engineered crops. These aspects are briefly discussed in this article.

Keywords


Green to Evergreen Revolution, Modern Technologies, Nutrition Security, Sustainable Food.

References





DOI: https://doi.org/10.18520/cs%2Fv115%2Fi10%2F1876-1883