A world without hunger is possible but only if food production is sustainably increased and distributed and extreme poverty is eliminated.
SCIENCE: https://bit.ly/2UIJE34
Globally, most of the poor and undernourished people live in
rural areas of developing countries, where they depend on agriculture
as a source of food, income, and employment. International data show a
clear association between low agricultural productivity and high rates
of undernourishment (1).
Global studies have also shown that rapid reduction of extreme poverty
is only possible when the incomes of smallholder farmers are increased (2).
Therefore, sustained improvement in agricultural productivity is
central to socioeconomic development. Here, we argue that with careful
deployment and scientifically informed regulation, new plant breeding technologies (NPBTs) such as genome editing will be able to contribute
substantially to global food security.
Previously,
conventional plant breeding through cross- and self-pollination
strategies played a major role in improving agricultural productivity.
Moreover, the adoption of genetically modified (GM) crops by smallholder
farmers has led to higher yields, lower pesticide use, poverty
reduction, and improved nutrition (2).
Nevertheless, so far only a few developing and emerging economies—such
as China, India, Pakistan, Bangladesh, and South Africa—have embraced GM
crops. Even though three decades of research show that GM crops are no more risky than conventional crops (3),
many countries in Africa and Asia are hesitant to promote the use of GM
crops, largely because of erroneously perceived risks and fears of
losing export markets to Europe.
In the meantime, NPBTs
have emerged. These technologies may allay fears associated with GM
crops. For example, recent advances in genome editing allow the
alteration of endogenous genes to improve traits in crops without
transferring transgenes across species boundaries. In particular,
CRISPR-Cas9 has emerged as one of the foremost systems with which to edit the crop genome, with rapidly increasing agricultural applications in
major cereals such as rice, wheat, and maize and other food security
crops such as banana and cassava (4).
Because of its low cost, genome editing can also be used to improve
orphan crops such as local fruits, vegetables, and staple crops that can
play an important role for healthy diets. The use of foreign DNA in
transgenic GM crops is the main reason for their heavy regulation.
Hence, the absence of transgenes in genome-edited crops could lower the
costs of the regulatory procedures and thus speed up innovation,
increase competition in the seed industry, and make improved seeds more
affordable for farmers in developing countries (2).
The lack of technical, regulatory, and communication capacities to
handle transgenic GM technologies locally has contributed to limited
public acceptance and adoption (5).
Scientific and sociopolitical developments are not always a continuum,
which is true in developed and developing countries alike. Therefore, a
renewed effort and strategy is necessary to facilitate the use and
adoption of genome-edited crops and other NPBTs that have much potential
to contribute to sustainable development. Learning lessons from the
past, the strategy should be based on transparent communication,
training of researchers and other stakeholders in the innovation system,
and efficient, informed regulation (see the box).
Public-private partnership has been perceived by many as one way to promote and implement NPBTs (6).
Such partnership is especially promising in more advanced developing
countries that are still home to a large number of people in poverty but
are already in a position of economic strength to negotiate mutual
benefits with private agribusiness companies. Plant produce and seeds
from these more advanced developing countries could also be delivered
regionally to neighboring less-developed countries, which would
otherwise have limited access to NPBTs or would have to pay much higher
prices. An existing intergovernmental initiative for rice seeds without
borders is a major step in this direction, which allows for seed sharing
between a number of South and Southeast Asian countries (7).
Such
intergovernmental initiatives could be taken to a new level through
companies working with Asian and African regional development and
cooperation bodies such as the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) or the New Partnership for Africa's Development (NEPAD).
Opportunities exist to capitalize on previous success stories of
public-private partnership, such as the development and commercial
release of transgenic insect-resistant eggplant in Bangladesh. The
recent public declaration of the Bangladesh minister of agriculture in
support of biotech and the initiatives of field-testing three additional
transgenic GM crops position Bangladesh as a global model for
addressing hunger and malnutrition through modern technology (8).
Another example is the Water Efficient Maize for Africa (WEMA) project,
in which drought-tolerant varieties are being developed with the
intention to make these available royalty-free to smallholder farmers
through African seed companies (9).
A concerted development plan for priority traits in food crops,
including orphan crops, should be elaborated, which would help to
demonstrate more broadly the large potential of new breeding
technologies for food security in developing countries (table S1).
The
toolbox of plant breeders is expanding in exciting ways. Rapid generation advance (RGA) and single-seed descent minimize crop life
cycle for research on breeding, selection, and fixing of useful genes (10).
This approach is already contributing to the improvement of several
grain crops, building on the slower and less accurate pedigree selection
methodologies that characterized the Green Revolution. Along with
these, genomic selection, which uses genotyping and imputation as a
strategy to predict the value of phenotypically uncharacterized plants
in a population, is also becoming popular. Current limitations in
breeding methods can also be partially addressed by the recent emergence
of the CRISPR-Cas systems that provide an effective suite of
applications and molecular tools to precisely and efficiently alter the
genome in a user-defined manner. CRISPR-Cas9–mediated gene knockout is
widely used for a variety of applications in crop improvement—for
example, high-yield rice, disease-resistant bread wheat, and
flavor-enhanced tomato. Other possible modalities include precise DNA
sequence editing, gene replacement, and simultaneous enhancement of
multiple traits (stacking), as well as promoter and regulatory element
engineering for altered gene expression patterns (11).
Additionally, CRISPR genome-wide screens can be used to identify
previously unknown valuable crop plant traits. However, the utility of
CRISPR technologies to improve quantitative traits—including drought and
salinity tolerance—remains to be tested in several crop species. We
anticipate that CRISPR-Cas technologies, in combination with modern
breeding methods, will play an important role in future crop improvement
programs, but other technologies for genomic prediction and selection
will also remain important.
Several interesting
applications of genome editing may become available in the next 5 years.
For instance, multiple food security crops could immediately benefit
from the new genome-editing technologies to address major pest and
disease problems, reduce the need for chemical pesticides, and make
plants more resilient to climate stress (table S1). Successful public or
public-private development of related crop varieties could serve as a
clear example to build trust and demonstrate local capacities to use
genome editing for local benefits. The target genes for improvement are
now more easily identified by the increasing number of high-quality crop
genomes and the allelic comparisons in crop and plant diversity panels.
The availability of such diversity in public databases is being
recognized by the private sector, which could foster mutually beneficial
public-private partnerships. The publicly funded Consultative Group on International Agricultural Research (CGIAR) has a mandate for most of
the major food security crops and unites regional organizations engaged
in research for a food-secure future (12).
Most CGIAR centers support crop-specific gene banks that can be
assessed for genome-edited improvements, in collaboration with regional
and national institutes. Previous efforts of the CGIAR to provide plant
genetic material to developing countries made it easier for breeders to
develop new crop varieties. Given their presence in different local
environments, the CGIAR centers could be a neutral coordinator of a
network of field research facilities for the development and testing of
genome-edited crops.
Improving plants with new technologies (BOX)
Responsible
and effective development and use of new plant breeding technologies
(NPBTs) in developing countries requires efficient regulation, objective
communication, and capacity building.
Regulation and commercialization
Regulation of crop varieties/products falling under evidence-based regulation
Coordinated field testing in national and international platforms
Delivery by public or public-private partnerships
Availability to smallholder farmers royalty-free
Communication
Raise awareness of global food security and how NPBTs can help
Raise awareness of safety of NPBTs and their advantages to society
Marketing with carefully designed strategies for NPBTs
Capacity building
Training scientists/biosafety regulators from developing countries
Incentives to relocate trained staff to laboratories in developing countries
Establishing local facilities for product development and stewardship
Global
opposition to transgenic GM crops explains why there are currently
limited applications of these crops. European attitudes and policy
approaches are particularly important in this respect. Given their
longstanding trade connections with Europe, African and Asian nations
also logically fear that adoption of transgenic crops could lead to the
loss of export opportunities to Europe, where opposition to genetically
modified organisms (GMOs) is now deeply ingrained (13).
Genome editing could represent a renewed opportunity to harness the
potentials of modern biotechnology for food security. However, the recent European Court of Justice ruling to regulate genome-edited crops in the same way as GMOs (14)
is disappointing and could stifle international progress in applying
genome-editing technologies for crop improvement. Nevertheless, the
rulings by the United States (15)
and Japan on relaxation of rules toward genome-edited crops are
expected to set the ground for a new paradigm that could lead to more
efficient regulation internationally. More than 30 years of experience
with GM crops show that regulatory procedures influence public attitudes
and that negative public attitudes in Europe can have a considerable
effect on public perceptions and policy in developing countries (2).
A less-restrictive regulation of genome-edited crops in the EU could
therefore send a positive signal to developing countries in need of
agricultural technologies for food security.
Achieving
global food security will require a framework based on the lessons
learned from the past: Innovation is essential, and thus an environment
facilitating innovation is also essential. In order to fully exploit the
potentials of NPBTs, a multipronged approach is needed, taking into
consideration all components involved in technology development,
dissemination, adoption, and social acceptance. NPBTs
should not be misunderstood as a panacea. Many other technologies and
approaches are needed as well, including improvements in postharvest
management, market infrastructure, and social services. However, genome
editing is predicted to be a powerful addition in the fight against
hunger and poverty. The global community should seize this opportunity
by developing conducive regulatory frameworks and support mechanisms.
Supplementary Materials
http://www.sciencemag.org/about/science-licenses-journal-article-reuse
This is an article distributed under the terms of the Science Journals Default License.
References and Notes
- ↵Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO), State of Food Security and Nutrition in the World (FAO, 2018). Google Scholar
- ↵
- ↵
- A. Nicolia,
- A. Manzo,
- F. Veronesi,
- D. Rosellini
- ↵
- S. E. Bull et al., Sci. Adv. 4, eaat6086 (2018).FREE Full TextGoogle Scholar
- ↵
- ↵
- ↵
- ↵
- ↵
- ↵
- ↵
- ↵
- ↵
- ↵
- ↵
