GM proponents say the technology leads to better crop yields and may solve food shortages and reduce pests. Opponents say GM is a threat to the environment and humans. So where does the truth lie?
If species already modify their genes, why shouldn’t we?
A government-commissioned report estimated that South Australia’s ban on genetically modified crops cost canola growers A$33 million since 2004.
Greenpeace/AAP Image
South Australia has lifted its moratorium on GM crops, while Tasmania has extended its ban. But the question should no longer be a simple binary of being “for” or “against” GM technology.
Laurie Nickel and her daughter Stephanie hold a protest sign during a union meeting after General Motors announced it would be closing its plant in Oshawa, Ont., that employs 2,500 people.
THE CANADIAN PRESS/Eduardo Lima
General Motors has announced it’s closing plants in Canada and the U.S. Many of the towns have built cars for decades or longer. A plant closing shatters people’s sense of belonging and identity.
Genome editing and synthetic biology are giving rise to new forms of life. But do these organisms have conservation value as part of earth’s biodiversity?
Modern agriculture is synonymous with monoculture. That lack of diversity is bad news for plants’ natural immune defenses. Researchers are figuring out how to help plants fend off microbes – without pesticides.
We’re talking about a lot of seeds.
Great Divide Photography
The concerns about genetically modified foods are well known. But when we look at population and climate projections, what happens if we don’t use them to increase our food supply?
The solutions presented by GM crops are rarely tested against the other options. Take a look at our philosophy of farming and it all starts to make sense.
The GM debate in the developing world encompasses countries with very different priorities. Through the shrill battle of interests, the real agents for change tend to be overlooked.