Small Farmers’ Struggle Recognized

By Jennifer Bromm

Three Bt cotton hybrids have been disallowed for cultivation in Andhra Pradesh, India following reports from farm organizations and release of a three year study on the agronomy of these varieties and their impact on farmers in the region. The study was released at the Southern Encounters conference in Hyderabad India in April. I was there to witness the event.

Three years ago the agro industry introduced genetically engineered cotton to India. These hybrids contain a gene from a bacterium (Bacillus thuringiensis) that allows them to produce a toxin to protect against bollworms. The biotech industry claimed that Bt cotton would bring economic benefits, especially for smallholder farmers. The Andhra Pradesh Coalition in Defense of Diversity (APCIDD) and the Deccan Development Society (DDS) initiated a systematic study with the following objectives:

1. To determine if genetically engineered Bt cotton met the promises of the seed producing companies to successfully resist the infestation of bollworms, reduce the application of pesticides, increase yields and increase profits to the farmer.
2. To compare Bt cotton and non Bt cotton under stress situations, especially rainfed conditions, and to examine problems and constraints if any, associated with the cultivation of Bt cotton.
3. To keep a sharp focus on the experiences of the small farmers under rainfed conditions.

Most small scale farmers in India do not keep detailed records, therefore researchers visited farmers every evening to log their activities. During the three years of the study, researchers visited 164 to 220 farmers for structured interviews that recorded each farmer’s income and expenditure patterns in regard to cultivation of Bt and non Bt cotton as well as the status of the crop, pest damage, and the use of fertilizers and pesticides. Participants were randomly selected and results were categorized by farm size and by whether the farm was irrigated or rainfed.

Did Bt cotton live up to the promises made at its introduction: better yield, reduced insect problems, reduced pesticide use, increased profits? In short, no.

In three years, the yields on the Bt cotton ranged from 65 to 105% of the non Bt cotton. Yield improvements for the Bt cotton under optimal conditions were marginal. Yields of the Bt cotton were much lower than non Bt cotton under drought conditions. Yield benefits, when they were seen, were greater for large farmers, and less for small and medium farmers; greater under irrigation and generally negative for rainfed conditions.

Insect problems were not eliminated by the Bt cotton, nor did Bt cotton dramatically reduce pesticide use. Bt cotton farmers used 86 – 120 % of the pesticide used by non Bt cotton farmers. Bollworm chemical use was reduced, but only by approximately 20%. Unfortunately, the Bt cotton farmers found greater difficulty from sucking pests and used more products to kill them.

In addition, the Bt cotton suffered from a Rhizoctonia-like root rot not at all common to the area. I heard testimonials from farmers who said they were unable to grow other crops on the land where the Bt cotton had been planted. Farmers whose Bt cotton crop failed thought they could go back to other crops only to find that nothing would grow.
In economic terms, the Bt cotton was not the success story that was anticipated. Farmers that used Bt cotton paid more than three times as much for their seed. The Bt cotton required greater fertilizer inputs. In total, most often the non Bt cotton farmer made more than the Bt cotton farmer. One of the difficulties with the Bt cotton was its greater vulnerability to harsh conditions: drought, low fertility, insects other than those specifically targeted by the Bt, and disease. The Bt cotton was aggressively marketed to small scale farmers on rainfed land as an answer to their economic problems. Although the Bt cotton might show agronomic promise under optimal conditions, it did not meet the needs of small scale, rainfed farms.

In 2005, farmers angry over the failure of hundreds of acres of Bt cotton held an agro industry representative hostage, and destroyed seed depots. The farmers had lost hope in the seeds, seed dealers and the government when such a huge crop failure was not addressed. Some of this hope was restored this May when government responded by disallowing these Bt cotton hybrids.

Jennifer Bromm is a research assistant with the Organic Agriculture Centre of Canada. She traveled to India with the Organic Agriculture Protection Fund. She can be reached at 306-966-8380, or jennifer.bromm@usask.ca. For additional info go to www.ddsindia.com.

Brenda Frick, Prairie Coordinator for the Organic Agriculture Centre of Canada can be reached at 306-966-4975 or at brenda.frick@usask.ca.