"Environmental Ethics"[The 9th G-COE Seminar] (Paradigm Formulation)

Date:June 16, 2008 (Mon.) 16：00-18：00PM

Venue:HW407, RISH
http://www.rish.kyoto-u.ac.jp/access.html

Title: Environmental Ethics

Presentation:
Nozomu Koizumi(Associate Professor, Osaka Prefecture University)
Title: Transgenic Crops and Human Survival

Commentator:
Mamoru Kanzaki (Associate Professor, Faculty Gruduate School of Agriculture)
Title: What do We Fear about Transgenic Crops?

In his presentation, Dr. Koizumi Nozomu discussed the present circumstances surrounding the research, production and consumption of genetically-modified crops. World conditions in the cultivation of genetically-modified crops were outlined first, and it was pointed out that over the past 10 years, there has been a sudden increase in the cultivation of these crops, centered on North and South America. The effectiveness of herbicide-resistant and insect-resistant crops and the situation of their cultivation were subsequently presented as a representative example of implementation, and it was indicated that the introduction of such crops contributes to decreases in costs and a reduction in the burden on the environment. Golden rice and decaf coffee crops were also introduced as examples of what can be expected in the future from present research in this area. Finally, conditions in the consumption of genetically-modified crops in Japan were explained, drawing comparison with world trends. An inconsistency was highlighted between the public disapproval of production and consumption of genetically-modified crops in Japan, and the fact that genetically-modified crops are in reality already being consumed through vegetable oil and soy source made from imported ingredients. In the presentation by Dr. Kanzaki Mamoru, the risks of genetically-modified crops were debated from the standpoint of ecological science. It was firstly emphasized that the technology of genetic recombination goes beyond the framework of traditional breeding technologies and offers a different kind of innovation, in doing so raising questions of bioethics. Then, two potential concerns were pointed out in the introduction of genetically-modified crops; the possibility of disturbing conventional agriculture which has low resistance to herbicides and pesticides, and the possibility of spreading genetic contamination of crops due to difficulties involved in completely controlling the flow of pollen. Finally, it was indicated that although these issues should be dealt with through risk management, the essential problem is that we have not yet formulated assumptions for these risks, and it was pointed out that, for this reason, environmental and corporate ethics play a significant role.

Discussion:

• Are we not overestimating the value of genetically-modified crops? The only really popular commodities at the moment are herbicide-resistant and insect-resistant crops. Regarding food safety, the standards that are employed in the inspection of genetically-modified crops are extremely exacting. While the effectiveness of crop management is certainly questionable, from the start many of the issues involved are not particular to the problem of genetically-modified crops.
• The problem of gene leakage is important. In the case of trees and shrubs in particular, direct influence of transfer on humans is small, unlike its influence on food products; influence on ecological systems, however, is very large. Another issue is that of the degree to which new technologies, including the monopolistic development and use of technologies by multinational corporations like Monsanto, contribute to improvements in the lives of the poorest segments of the population in developing nations.
• There is no way to deal with risks that cannot be anticipated. The management of forests is more difficult than the management of fields, so the risks of gene leakage are as such higher. For the most part, however, these problems are not different from problems of naturalized plants encountered in the past. In the case of development in developing countries, not all problems concern multinational corporations, as seen for example in the case of papaya development. In the background for the failure of this kind of practical development to go forward in for example Thailand, however, is the fact that Japan does not purchase genetically-modified crops. As this case demonstrates, it would seem that there are cases in which the ego of a developed country gets in the way of technology transfer to developing countries.
• What happens to ethics of the market given the fact that in Japan’s attitude with regard to genetically-modified crops, there is a total inconsistency between the country’s official stance and actual patterns of consumption? Should the Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries not be made to explain this attitude more clearly?

(Fumikazu Ubukata)