Broken Promise? Monsanto Promotes Terminator Seed Technology

[tliouk]

Broken Promise? Monsanto Promotes Terminator Seeds 
Date: April 23rd, 2003

 

News Release

23 April 2003

www.etcgroup.org

 

Broken Promise? 

Monsanto Promotes Terminator Seed Technology

 

At its annual meeting on Thursday, April 24th, Monsanto's top brass 
will greet shareholders with a dismal financial report, (a 15% drop 
in annual sales - $4.7 billion in 2002, down from $5.5 billion in 
2001) and a shareholder resolution that urges the company to re-think 
the safety of genetically engineered seeds - now the company's 
flagship product. But there's potentially more troubling news - a 
little known position paper that could rattle shareholders, irk 
investors and erode public confidence still further in the biotech 
behemoth: Despite its 1999 pledge not to commercialize Terminator 
technology, Monsanto has recently adopted a positive stance on 
genetic seed sterilization, a technology that has been condemned by 
civil society and some governments as an immoral application of 
genetic engineering.

 

"If Monsanto is reversing its public pledge on Terminator, it will be 
perceived as a colossal corporate betrayal of the public good - just 
one more example of corporate greed and fickle governance," explains 
Hope Shand, Research Director of ETC Group, "Market confidence in 
biotech is already low - it could evaporate if Monsanto violates its 
public pledge on Terminator seeds." ETC Group, formerly known as 
RAFI, is one of hundreds of civil society, farmers and indigenous 
peoples organizations worldwide that has called for a ban on 
Terminator as an anti-farmer, anti-diversity technology that, if 
commercialized, would prevent farmers from saving seed from their 
harvest.

 

Monsanto's new pro-Terminator position came to public light when the 
Lyon-based International Seed Federation (ISF) released a position 
paper on Terminator or GURTs (genetic use restriction technology - 
the scientific name for Terminator) that defends the potential 
benefits of genetic seed sterilization and extols the theoretical 
virtues of Terminator for small farmers and indigenous peoples. Co-
authored by Monsanto's Roger Krueger and Harry Collins of Delta & 
Pine Land (D&PL), the ISF position paper on Terminator was prepared 
for a February 19-21 meeting of an Expert Panel convened by the 
United Nations' Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) that met to 
discuss the implications of Terminator technology for small farmers, 
indigenous peoples and local communities. 

 

The full text of ISF's position paper on Terminator is available 
here: http://www.etcgroup.org/documents/collins_kreugerISF.pdf

 

Both Krueger and Collins attended the Montreal meeting and served on 
the Expert Panel. (Harry Collins of D&PL represented the 
International Seed Federation at the meeting, and Roger Krueger of 
Monsanto represented the Biotechnology Industry Organization.)

 

Corporate Amnesia?  "It's not surprising that the International Seed 
Federation is coming out in favor of a technology that is designed to 
maximize seed industry profits," said Jim Thomas, Programme Officer 
of ETC Group, "but it's alarming that one of the authors of the paper 
is an employee of Monsanto - the multinational Gene Giant that, in 
response to overwhelming public opposition, pledged in 1999 not to 
develop genetic seed sterilization." 

 

In October 1999, Gordon Conway, President of the Rockefeller 
Foundation addressed the Monsanto Board of Directors and urged them 
to abandon pursuit of Terminator seeds. Then-Monsanto CEO Robert 
Shapiro responded in an open letter to Rockefeller, in which the 
company pledged "not to commercialize gene protection systems that 
render seed sterile."(1) Since Monsanto made that pledge, the company 
was acquired by pharma giant Pharmacia, and then spun-off again as a 
separate company. Shapiro is long gone, Monsanto's new CEO resigned 
in December 2002, and there appears to be a total loss of corporate 
memory on Terminator.

 

The ETC Group has learned that there were dissenting views amongst 
the Gene Giants regarding the pro-Terminator position taken by the 
seed industry trade group. Apparently some of the Gene Giants thought 
that the pro-Terminator paper, "The Benefits of GURTs," was too 
risky - but the pro-Terminator faction won the day. The International 
Seed Federation's final position paper is unmistakably pro-Terminator:

 

"The International Seed Federation (ISF) believes that GURTs have the 
potential to benefit farmers and others in all size, economic and 
geographical areas...In reality, the potential effects of the GURTs 
may be beneficial to small farmers and quite positive for the 
environment and biodiversity.(2)

 

 "It is the strong belief and position of the ISF that GURTs would 
potentially provide more choice, to the farmers, rather than less 
choice."(3)

 

Silvia Ribeiro responds to the ISF position, "It's difficult to 
understand how Terminator could offer more choice to farmers, 
especially given the fact that Monsanto's genetically engineered 
seeds already account over 90% of all biotech seeds planted 
worldwide. That's not more choice, that's oligopoly!"

 

Testing the Waters? Now that Monsanto is publicly spearheading the 
seed industry's pro-Terminator campaign, will it resurrect a program 
to develop Terminator seeds? Or is Monsanto simply hoping to pave the 
way for other companies to take the first step in commercializing the 
controversial, anti-farmer technology? D&PL, the company that co-
authored the ISF paper with Monsanto, has publicly vowed to 
commercialize Terminator technology, and jointly owns three 
Terminator patents with the US Department of Agriculture. Is Monsanto 
testing the waters for a future acquisition of Delta & Pine Land? The 
first attempt was botched at the end of 1998, when Monsanto pulled 
out of its announced merger deal with D&PL, in large part due to the 
Terminator seed controversy.

 

Biotech's Trojan Seeds: The Gene Giants are hoping that public 
opinion has softened because of a campaign to "greenwash" Terminator 
as a biosafety tool. They are eagerly endorsing Terminator as a 
technology that will contain gene flow from GM plants. According to 
the ISF paper:

 

"It is believed that in the improbable event of transgenes in GURT 
crop plants escaping, through pollen, to related wild species, the 
resulting seed from these pollinations will not express the new trait 
or will be unable to form a viable seed, thus preventing the 
possibility of undesirable gene flow."(4)

 

"If Terminator is commercialized under the guise of biosafety, we 
know that it will be incorporated in all genetically engineered 
seeds," explains Silvia Ribeiro of ETC Group, "Seed sterility is the 
ultimate monopoly-maker. With sterile seeds, the Gene Giants have 
limitless control over plant germplasm, with no expiration date, 
without patents or lawyers."

 

Ultimately, Monsanto's position on Terminator is of paramount 
importance to world food security, particularly for over 1.4 billion 
people who depend on farm-saved seed.  In 2002, Monsanto's 
genetically engineered seed traits were grown on 56 million hectares 
(138.3 million acres) worldwide.(5)

 

Mayday for Monsanto?  With Monsanto's annual meeting taking place on 
April 24th, shareholders should demand corporate accountability for 
Monsanto's public promises.  Where does Monsanto really stand on 
Terminator? Will Monsanto's shareholders get the straight story on 
the company's position? Following a frosty reception in the heartland 
of the US for Monsanto's genetically engineered wheat, and a tough-
sell for GM seeds worldwide, Terminator could be the seed that breaks 
the Mammoth's back.

 

For more information:

 

Hope Shand, ETC Group (USA) hope at etcgroup.org

Jim Thomas, ETC Group (UK) jim at etcgroup.org 

Silvia Ribeiro, ETC Group (Mexico) silvia at etcgroup.org

 

The Action Group on Erosion, Technology and Concentration, formerly 
RAFI, is an international civil society organization headquartered in 
Canada. The ETC group is dedicated to the advancement of cultural and 
ecological diversity and human rights.  www.etcgroup.org. The ETC 
group is also a member of the Community Biodiversity Development and 
Conservation Programme (CBDC).  The CBDC is a collaborative 
experimental initiative involving civil society organizations and 
public research institutions in 14 countries.  The CBDC is dedicated 
to the exploration of community-directed programmes to strengthen the 
conservation and enhancement of agricultural biodiversity.  The CBDC 
website is www.cbdcprogram.org .

 

 

1 Monsanto's open letter to Rockefeller is available at: 
http://www.biotech-info.net/monsanto_letter.pdf  (We were not able to 
locate the open letter on Monsanto's web site.)

2 Harry B. Collins and Roger W. Krueger, "Potential Impact of GURTs 
on Smallholder Farmers, Indigenous & Local Communities and Farmers 
Rights: The Benefits of GURTs," p. 1. Paper made available to the 
CBD's Ad Hoc Technical Expert Group on the Impact of GURTs on 
Smallholder Farmers, Indigenous People and Local Communities, 
February 19-21, 2003. The paper is presented as the official position 
paper of the International Seed Federation. 

3 Ibid., p. 3.

4 Ibid., p. 3-4.

5 Monsanto web site: http://media.corporate-
ir.net/media_files/NYS/MON/reports/4Q02Acreage.pdf