We have been writing articles and doing research on the BT Brinjaal debate for over a year now and have been learning more about the history of Eggplant. We never knew why it is called Eggplant in the United States but Aubergine in many other english speaking countries until we read this:
“The African eggplant was the first of two related species that Europeans came across. It was named because the size, shape, and color of the vegetable resembled a hen’s egg. The purple Asian species retained the original, but inappropriate, African name when it became more popular in global foodways. The African eggplant is the guinea squash reported in plantation societies. It is esteemed for its bitter taste and edible green leaves.”
- In the Shadow of Slavery: Africa’s Botanical Legacy in the Atlantic World
by Judith A. Carney and Richard Nicholas Rosomoff
One question we keep returning to is:
Why did Monsanto/Mahyco attempt to gain approval for Eggplant as opposed to any of the other transgenic frutis/vegetables that would have garnered less popular resistance?
Here are a few findings that seem to offer on explanation:
Top Eggplant Producers 2009 (millions of tonnes)
1. People’s Republic of China – 19.02
2. India – 10.37
3. Egypt – 1.25
4. Turkey – 0.81
5. Indonesia – 0.44
6. Iraq – 0.39
7. Japan – 0.34
8. Italy – 0.24
9. Philippines – 0.20
10. Spain – 0.17
It appears that Monsanto believed if they could gain approval in India, a massive market by any standard, they would dominate Eggplant production outside of China. China has its own home-grown transgenic varietals and would not likely strictly enforce Monsanto’s IP even if farmers were growing the plant. (Legally or illegally).
We have examined foodways and agricultural biodiversity a lot in this blog, and it appears that one of the rallying points for the popular resistance to the approval of this product in India is the sheer diversity of the plant, and the personal cultural and geographic connection many eaters feel to their varietals. We still have not found good documentation of which cultivars had been genetically modified or were planned to be sold.
An image from India’s Environmental Minister listening tour I attended in Bangalore:
And a fact that we finally learned about Eggplant:
2 Comments
Its interesting that even though you state that the growers enjoy their biodiversity of eggplants, your thesis for the entry is that a varietal release by Monsanto will reduce genetic diversity. So, let me get this straight – by releasing a variety, we decrease the available germplasm?
Monsanto does not control genetic diversity that is planted within the field, the farmer does. It is the farmers choice. By protesting the release of a variety, GE or not, you are infringing on free enterprise, the foundation of wealth for farmer and business-man alike.
If you are anti-GMO, wouldn’t it be better for Monsanto to release the product, it becomes a failure due to lack of interest of planting by farmers, thus reducing Monsanto’s motivation of producing another product?
This should be the decision of the farmer, not an activist.
Dave – some interesting points.
Hopefully you know more about the most obvious question I have not been able to answer yet through my research
“What varietals of Brinjal did Mahyco genetically engineer and field test?”
If a Genomic Gastronomer wants to write recipes for BT Brinjal, they would obviously have to know what kind of Brinjal they are going to be cooking with.
Hopefully I am not just totally blind, but for the life of me I have not been able to find any primary source articles that list which varietals of Aubergene Mahyco used in their field tests and were seeking approval for. I am going to keep digging, but feel free to pass on any data you might find.
Here are some follow ups on your points:
“Its interesting that even though you state that the growers enjoy their biodiversity of eggplants, your thesis for the entry is that a varietal release by Monsanto will reduce genetic diversity.”
No, it is of course infinitely more complex than that. I attended the debate in Bangalore as an observer, and I was very interested that one of the critiques of the approval of this plant by farmers, activists and (I believe) indigenous seed companies was the perception that the approval of BT Brinjal would reduce OVERALL agricultural biodiversity if the farmers who currently grow local landraces / heirloom varietals and other cultivars moved over to the BT Brinjal variety. I am not sure what the implications of moving from many regional varieties to a (hypothetically) more resilient GE variety would mean for overall biodiversity. Presumably there are tradeoffs. Local varietals may encourage certain interactions which improve over ecosystem health, while on the other hand certain farming practices that are currently employed could be quite detrimental to biodiveristy. I don’t have a lot of specifics but would love to find them out. Maybe cross-cultural farm studies for those that employ GE crops and those that employ non-GE hybrids, and those that employ non-GE, non-hybdrids would be in order. Can you point me to any good peer reviewed articles?
“So, let me get this straight – by releasing a variety, we decrease the available germplasm?”
Introducing any new varietal increases the POTENTIAL for agricultural biodiversity. A wider range of germplasm to choose from, whether GE or not is useful to have at our disposal, to implement in the face of emerging disease and changing environmental conditions, hence Seed Banks. However, from the people that I heard speak in Bangalore, there was a fear, whether founded or not, that the introduction of Mahyco’s product on the market, especially with their massive advertising and marketing campaign (which I can share with you if interested) would lead to a NET DECREASE in the agrciutlrual biodiversity on the ground. Again, this is based in local perception, by farmers, policy makers etc. and I would love to see any data that might exist about the effects of GE plants on Agricultural Biodiveristy. From what I can tell in the U.S. transgenic seeds have primarily perpetuated existing industrialized farming and gastronomic preferences and have not lead to the an increase of different kinds of varietals in the ground. However, the majority of GE varietals available commercially are highly processed: corn, cotton etc. That is what makes BT Brinjal so interesting, the end EATER would be sensitive to which varietal they were actually getting – different varietals require different recipes and preparation methods.
“Monsanto does not control genetic diversity that is planted within the field, the farmer does. It is the farmers choice.”
Mahyco (Monsanto’s Indian subsidiary) certainly does not DIRECTLY control what the farmer plants, but as a for-profit institution they obviously would like to sell more rather than less of their products. They have spent a lot of money doing advertising and marketing about their product. Mahyco may also feel their product offers farmers some advantages and want to communicate this to the farmer. But as serious researchers about the history of agriculture and food we can’t be so naive to think that farmers are rational actors that have all information. The world is complex, and decisions about which crops to grow highly contingent on local power structures, markets, history, preferences, biases, etc.
“By protesting the release of a variety, GE or not, you are infringing on free enterprise, the foundation of wealth for farmer and business-man alike.”
Citizens in every functioning democracy have asked their states to do certain things in relation to food systems – such as have grain reserves to prevent the risk of starvation, create various processes for setting standards and testing the health of food etc. Farmers & eaters are both citizens and consumers and there will always be a balance between “free enterprise” and safety, deliberation and oversight by citizens. This is to say nothing of values and preferences about food – tradition, flavor etc.
“If you are anti-GMO, wouldn’t it be better for Monsanto to release the product, it becomes a failure due to lack of interest of planting by farmers, thus reducing Monsanto’s motivation of producing another product?”
I am not sure the question is about being anti-GMO as it is about understanding the complexity of food systems, agricultural biodiversity, food security in all of their aspects, and taking into account the needs of citizens, consumers and cultures.
“This should be the decision of the farmer, not an activist.”
Most of the people I saw speak at this meeting were farmers, and they had a variety of opinions and beliefs, some of which I thought were rational and thoughtful and some which seemed more irrational and based on bad information. However, this whole debate has taken place with incomplete information.
Beyond concerns about the transgenic aspect of BT Brinjal, the question of varietals was never explicit. So I am not sure how a farmer, policy maker, activist or anyone could make a complete decision about whether they wanted to grow BT Brinjal even if it became available.
I am sure one of the field test documents records the varietals. I look forward to your assistance in tracking this essential piece of information down.