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.
- Phomopsis stem canker in sunflowers
- Conference to help companies take next steps in eBusiness
- Energy for growing crops is large part of farm operating costs
- Moves in livestock futures bracketed those of the crop markets
- 3D Robotics launches new 3DR mapping platforms
- Report finds ag employers can’t fill STEM jobs
- How much corn can the ethanol industry use?
- USDA releases 2012 cash rents data report
- Commentary: Government wants farmers to quit farming
- Economist: Taxing P could reduce risk of algal blooms
- White House issues veto threat on bill to block WOTUS rule
- Resistant weeds not controlled by fall residuals