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.
- Syngenta global cereals collaborations hit home
- DuPont Pioneer continues support of agriscience education
- New study highlights need for increased innovation
- Water ‘thermostat’ could help engineer drought-resistant crops
- Bayer CropScience expands Bayer SeedGrowth Centers
- Rising Black Sea tensions are supporting the crop markets
- No El Niño in 2014? Drought-weary California in trouble
- Suspected Bt corn rootworm resistance in Pennsylvania
- Soybean aphid numbers on the rise
- BioNitrogen to build second fertilizer plant in Texas
- Commentary: Setting the record straight on 'Waters of the U.S.'
- Anti-GMO proposal denounced at Safeway shareholder meeting