AC21 issues biotech report; reaction mixed
Food and Water Watch is an example of an organization that was disappointed with the final report. Wenonah Hauter, executive director of Food and Water Watch, said the insurance mechanism would put the financial burden on the non-GE farmers and criticized the report as upholding the status quo.
She also said that the patent-holding biotech companies should be the ones responsible for compensating non-GE farmers.
“Aside from the fact that organic and non-GE growers should not be responsible for their harm from GE contamination, there are growing concerns that a crop insurance mechanism is not feasible for organic growers,” Hauter said. “Often, organic growers are reimbursed for losses at conventional prices—instead of receiving the premium associated with their specialized production—and others do not even have access to crop insurance because there is less risk data associated with these crops.”
To view the final report, click here.
- Adequate rhizobia populations help protect soybean yields
- In-season imagery helps farmers grow and protect healthy crops
- Ag markets proved rather volatile Wednesday afternoon
- Farm Bill enables record USDA investments in rural water systems
- Ag markets diverged Wednesday morning
- Do soybeans need N fertilizer?
- Commentary: Blame anti-GMO groups for deaths
- Julie Borlaug says biotech is necessary in fight against hunger
- What does “sustainable” food and agriculture really mean?
- Ohio bill to require certification to apply fertilizer
- Carbon-dioxide hurts nitrogen assimilation by plants
- FCC aims to offer high-speed internet to rural America