“Urban farming could be a solution in the fight to combat climate change and to strengthen food security. Native seeds preserve and improve soils,” Yadira de los Santos, one of the seven partners in the Alux cooperative, tells Equal Times.

The organisation is offering over 70 vegetable, aromatic herb and flower seed varieties, mostly organic, such as lettuce, tomato, basil and lavender. They are gathered by growers from Mexico City and the neighbouring states.

“The most valuable are the flowers, because they are hard to come by. What we are asked for most are vegetable and aromatic herb seeds,” explains Yadira de los Santos.

The seeds, which can be kept for one to two years before planting, have a viability of over 90 per cent.

Traditional Mexican farmers choose seeds they can conserve, use for future sowing and improve the varieties, to exchange with other growers, as well as to protect their soils and preserve the local food culture.

“Healthy soils for a healthy life” is, in fact, the slogan of the 2015 International Year of Soils, as declared by the United Nations.

Mexico is the stage of the most heated debate over genetically modified organisms (GMO).

The GMFuturos study conducted in Mexico, Brazil and India by four multidisciplinary teams highlights the different perspectives on GM crops in these three countries.

“GM crops were not introduced at the request of farmers and consumers, they have been imposed from above, and their acceptance is uncertain. GM crops are linked to interests rather than needs,” explains Susana Carro-Ripalda, a researcher from the Anthropology Department of Durham University, in the United Kingdom, in an interview with Equal Times about the findings of the research.

Mexican resistance

Two paradigms can be found in Mexico. One is characterised by the large-scale producers in the north, the pro-GM scientists and the exploitation of free market mechanisms.

The other is formed by the traditional farmers in the central and southern parts of the country who use agro-ecological methods and appropriate technology according to the area and the crops.

Carro-Ripalda, the head of the research project, explains that maize is considered emblematic in the fight against neoliberal policies, the defence of traditional lifestyles and the quest to democratise the country.

The three-year study, funded by the John Templeton Foundation, identified issues such as the lack of transparency and broad public participation in governance and decision-making processes on agriculture and the development of genetically modified crops in the three countries. It found that GM crops had been imposed from above without public consultations on whether they were necessary or desirable.

Furthermore, the lack of consideration for the potential impact that the release of GMOs could have on conserving biodiversity poses a threat to indigenous varieties and, in turn, to the wellbeing of people and small farmers in particular.

GM cotton has been produced on a commercial scale in Mexico since 2009. But the granting of permits for the commercial cultivation of GM corn has been suspended since September 2013, following a court ruling on a lawsuit filed in July of that year by 53 individuals and 20 civil society organisations.

In addition, since March 2014, beekeepers and indigenous community organisations have won two lawsuits against the commercial planting of GM soybeans in the south-eastern states of Campeche and Yucatán.

In 2014, the National Service for Agri-Food Health, Safety and Quality (SENASICA) received four applications from the biotechnology industry and public research centres for the experimental planting of GM corn.

It also received three applications for experimental, pilot and commercial planting of 1.18 million hectares of cotton, as well as one application to sow beans, five for wheat, three for lemons and one for soybeans – all experimental.

The BRICS and GMOs

In Brazil, GMOs, especially soybeans and corn, saw exponential growth following the passage of the Biosafety Law in 2005.

By 2012, GM crops covered almost 37 million hectares, accounting for 21 per cent of the worldwide biotech crop and making it the world’s second largest producer after the United States.

There, the focus of the debate has shifted towards calls for a pesticide-free country and nutritious foods.

In India, the approval of BT cotton (Bacillus thuringiensis, a type of genetically-modified cotton) in 2002 sparked a controversy that was reignited in 2009 with the approval of the commercial growing of genetically modified aubergine – a decision subsequently overturned by the Supreme Court in 2012. The GM lobby firmly opposed the ban.

Concerns were expressed in India over the responsibility of the government and business interests, the protection of biological and cultural diversity and the application of democratic standards.

“Governments should govern for the people, not for multinationals, and should defend the public interest, promoting scientific models and technological innovation that respond to people’s needs,” says Carro-Ripalda.

The study by GMFuturos A new approach to governing GM crops? suggests that good governance of GMOs should take on board public values and concerns and not be confined to dealing only with the risks and biosafety issues.

GMFuturos adds that the issue of GM crops cannot be dealt with in isolation from agricultural practices and farming communities, because food is a fundamental part of people’s culture and identity.

In this sense, the concerns of producers, consumers and other potential stakeholders regarding transgenic biotechnology should be taken into consideration.

It is against this background that Yadira de los Santos defends agroecology. “We have seen that harvests are better with organic products,” insists the specialist, whose organisation produces natural pesticides and fertilisers.