Who is Greenpeace working for?
Next year, the Asean markets will be integrated. This means tariff-free trade among Asean countries. And this poses risks to our producers, particularly the agricultural sector, which cannot compete with our neighbors because our production costs are high. Tariff collected from imported products protects our own products from the cheaper imports. When the tariff is added to the price of the import, it becomes more expensive than the local produce.
That protection will be gone with the integration of the Asean markets. Imported products from our neighbors can come in freely. No need to smuggle rice, for example, because cheaper rice from Vietnam and other Asean countries can come in freely, duty-free. That may be good for consumers, but very bad for producers, particularly our farmers.
However, that also means that Philippine products can enter our neighboring countries duty-free.
In a recent article, Dr. Emil Javier, prominent Filipino scientist and former head of the University of the Philippines System, called attention to the risks and opportunities in the coming Asean market integration. His work should push our officials to make a thorough examination of the country’s ability to compete—or even just to survive—in that regional development.
According to Javier, who earned his PhD in plant breeding and genetics from Cornell
University and his bachelor’s degree in agriculture (major in agronomy) from the University of Illinois, both in the United States, the crop-production sector, particularly rice and sugar farmers, is most vulnerable to the risks posed by lower-priced products from Vietnam and Thailand. Without help from the government to raise their competitive abilities, our rice and sugar farmers may face virtual extinction.
In fact, even without market integration, our rice farmers are having a difficult time competing against imported—and smuggled—rice. The adverse effects of the legal
entry of these commodities in large volumes beginning next year paint a grim scenario for our farmers.
However, Javier pointed to a bright spot where the local agriculture sector may actually stand a chance. This is the yellow-corn sector. The produce of this sector is what supports the local livestock and poultry industries. Given the performance of this sector, the view is that it can propel the country to exporter status while staving off the onslaught of imported varieties starting next year.
The yellow-corn sector’s success is significantly due to the widespread adoption by our farmers of a biotech corn variety. Based on the research done by Javier, the University of the Philippines Los Baños, and scientists from other countries, the biotech corn variety has a built-in resistance to pests and therefore does not require the application of chemical pesticides.
This resistance to pests has helped the sector’s produce to conform to export-quality standards. Javier believes that the Philippines can soon start exporting yellow corn to countries with very large livestock industries, like South Korea.
There is one major obstacle, however.
There is a major effort by the European special interest group Greenpeace to stop the Philippines from further propagating the use of biotechnology to improve crop types and harvests.
That technology is now caught in a legal war at the Supreme Court. Our scientists and farmers are asking the high court to lift a restraining order won by Greenpeace in the Court of Appeals. If our scientists and farmers get a favorable decision, the field trials and commercialization of biotech crop varieties can be continued. But if Greenpeace wins, hopes that we can use biotechnology to improve harvests and help the Philippines compete in the international market will be dim.
The stakes in this biotech war being waged in the country by Greenpeace have become higher.
This is unfortunate. As we have said before, the power of choice is what would alleviate the plight of our farmers. It is important to make them capable of exercising this power to choose what crop type and what technology to use in their farms. A Greenpeace victory may permanently impair that freedom of choice.
At present, the Philippines’ ability to compete against the agricultural products of its neighbors and its ability to become an exporter of food products hang in the balance. We face the loss of not just the power of choice but also the power to compete and survive.
Given the high stakes, we prefer that the freedom of choice of our farmers and of our country be protected and preserved.
The big question is: Why is Greenpeace doing this when biotechnology can improve the lives not only of Filipinos but also of the peoples of other nations? Some people suspect that Greenpeace is secretly working for the big manufacturers of chemical pesticides who will lose their lucrative markets if pest-resistant crops are propagated through biotechnology.
