Seizing Africa’s Climate change opportunity

Saving our planet, lifting people out of poverty, advancing economic growth… these are one and the same fight – Ban Ki-moon former UN Secretary-General

On the 8th October the UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change released a report and  its frightening. The report warns that there are only 12 years for global warming to be kept to a maximum of a 1.5C rise set by the Paris accords. Anything beyond that will radically increase the risks of flooding, droughts, and extreme heat. Keeping warming to 1.5C is possible but will require concerted global action, something that has been elusive thus far.

For Africa the situation is dire, the continent will bear the brunt of climate change. As CarbonBrief  points out the heat waves will get hotter, the rainy seasons will become more erratic and droughts more likely. For a continent largely reliant on rain fed agriculture it means yet more cycles of drought and famine. The implications of climate change for Africa, if we do nothing, will further entrench poverty for another generation, and displace millions creating climate refugees.

However, this does not need to happen. Climate change is not a good thing, but as the saying goes ‘you should never let a good crisis go to waste’. Climate change is a crisis for Africa, but it is also an opportunity. Rather, than hold out our proverbial begging bowl for money and technical assistance to foster resilience, which is the strategy of most African governments at climate change summits. We can use climate change as the spark for transformation, as we actively seek to mitigate its effects and minimise the continents contribution to climate change. It can be an opportunity to harness science and technology and equip our farmers with tools to feed the continent in an era of shifting weather patterns. To leapfrog fossil fuel energy and lay the foundation of Africa’s economic and social development on green sustainable energy. And to take up the mantle of leadership where the worlds advanced nations have failed to do so. In previous posts (here and here) I have advocated for a conception of development in Africa with the dignity of all Africans as its core goal. Anybody thinking about development in Africa in the 21st century has to account for climate change, as climate change not only endangers our environment but our development and dignity as well. However, with smart, forward-looking policy it need not be a disaster.

Harnessing science to transform agriculture

Agriculture is the employer and source of livelihood for about 60% of the continent. The impact of climate change on agriculture in Africa will be significant and we are already seeing it. This is only the beginning, as pointed out earlier, the bigger the increase in warming the more pronounced these effects will be. This poses a challenge to African states, farmers and consumers; how can we ensure that we can grow enough to feed a growing continent. A large part of that answer lies in investing in science and technology to empower African farmers. To give them the tools (such as GM crops which I have written about previously) that can handle the changing climatic conditions and boost yields. Using technology to give farmers better knowledge about weather, soil and water conditions so they can improve yields, access to markets so they can get the best prices, and access to storage facilities so that we can cut post-harvest losses.

Investing in science and technology would not only help farmers and feed the continent it could provide the push we need to grow our scientific and technological capabilities on the continent. Industrialisation, development, science and technology are intimately linked and if Africa is to succeed in the 21st century digital and knowledge economy it must develop its STEM capabilities. Confronting the challenges of climate change, such as the ones it poses to agriculture could be the African moonshot, that spurs innovation and industry throughout the economy.

Leapfrogging dirty energy

Leapfrogging is the idea that less developed regions, countries or companies can advance rapidly through the adoption of modern systems without going through intermediary steps. The classic case of this in Africa is mobile phones. Mobile phones allowed most of the continent to skip expensive copper land lines, and the embrace of the technology has revolutionised many aspects of life and the economy. Like phone lines we have the ability to leapfrog fossil fuels. Renewable energy is now getting to a stage where they are almost as cheap and will soon be cheaper than fossil fuels. There are some who would argue that fossil fuels like coal are cheap and readily available, however that is increasingly untrue and African countries have free and broad access to the sun and wind. There are others who argue that developed nations used fossil fuels to industrialise and thus why should Africa be disadvantaged by not using them. But that sounds like a petulant child arguing that they too should be allowed to misbehave because everyone else did, frankly Africa has to be better than that. By investing in green ways of generating energy and innovative (e.g. mini-grids) of getting it to the people who need it, Africa can lay a sustainable foundation for its development. We can leapfrog the dirty fossil fuel generating plants and possibly even the expensive centralised electricity grid systems, most importantly we can develop our economies not at the expense of future generations but with their welfare in mind.

Leading the world

We may be a poor continent but that does not mean that Africa cannot lead on key issues. From the 1960’s onwards African nations led the international and diplomatic fight against apartheid South Africa. Boycotting international events, helping South African exiles and the ANC, getting the apartheid government banned from international fora and sports, sanctioning and boycotting their economy, it took a while eventually the rest of the world caught up and the apartheid system fell. The developed world has displayed a remarkable lack of leadership on the issue of climate change. Australia and the USA have leaders in charge who, despite the mass of evidence, deny climate change. Canada and the EU talk a good game but are yet to make those hard choices that would have a real impact on carbon emissions (like taxing carbon). There is a gap which Africa could fill. With policies, like putting a tax on the carbon emissions content of imports. with actions and putting our money where our mouth is, such as investing in green energy instead of fossil fuels. And smart diplomacy – combining our voice on the global stage to help build consensus, shame others into action and forge constructive engagement with the issue of climate change. Not all global leadership issues require a big wallet, or a big gun, determination and concerted effort can make a difference. This is not just wishful thinking on my part, as the continent in line to bear the biggest impacts of climate change, utilising whatever influence we may have to get global action is effort well spent.

Climate opportunity

The 2018 winners of the Nobel prize for economics were Paul Romer and William Nordhaus. Both won for their work on economic growth over the long term and though they did not work together, the work they did does dovetail. Romer’s work looked at how innovation and new technologies come about, and he found that by investing in innovation (like funding research and development initiatives) you can boost economic growth in the wider economy. Nordhaus’ work looked at the connection between the economy and the environment and the impact of climate change on the economy and wider society. Their work comes together in a rather simple way, to combat climate change, to shift our societies and economies to low-carbon ones, will require innovation, new technologies and new policies. We need to invest in the knowledge and ideas that will combat and mitigate the effects of climate change.  Most importantly what Nordhaus and Romer’s work suggests is that by investing in knowledge and ideas and implementing them you can generate long-term growth. Thus, by combating climate change we could actually stimulate economic growth.

For Africa this is an opportunity to do the right thing for current and future generations, and to lay the foundation for the development that we have been chasing for the last half century. Climate change could be a disaster for Africa, or it could be the thing that forces us to pursue a path that leads to long-term, sustainable growth. It will require us to be innovative with our policies, to rethink our ideas of development and industrialisation and to invest in the ingenuity, knowledge and innovation of African’s from all walks of life. Climate change will be one of the defining issues of the 21st century and Africa faces a choice, we can be a victim, or we can take the initiative, take responsibility and make it the springboard to a sustainable successful future.

Genetically modified crops can work for Africa, but only if Africa owns it.

“Sixty per cent of the world’s arable land available today is in Africa. All efforts to feed the world — not just to feed Africa, but to feed the world — in the next decade or more are going to focus on Africa. Which means Africa has to do it right and have the scientific basis not to mess it up.” – Calestous Juma

Genetically Modified Organisms (GMO) are a topic that provokes spirited debate between its detractors and proponents. One side insists that GM crops offer a second green revolution to a continent with persistent food security problems, and governments and people should just get over their reservations and embrace them. The other side warns of dire ecological, economic, health and neo-colonial consequences if Africa allows its crops to come under the control of the corporate mono-culturalists for whom profit is their sole goal with the apparent concern around the health and well-being of Africans and their environment being PR at best.

This is not a black and white issue. Both sides have valid viewpoints. GM crops do have the potential to be highly beneficial to African farmers and enhance the food security and health of millions around the continent. However, the practices of the corporations that make, distribute and are lobbying for GM crops are disturbing. Furthermore, the concerns for people’s health and ecological sustainability should not be dismissed but addressed with data and testing.

Like the debate around GM crops, Africa does not face a black and white choice of refusal or submission GM crops and the companies that make them. Africa can chart a different path, with a policy that puts African farmers, food security and innovation at its heart. Africa can tap into the potential benefits of GM crops, driven by the needs of its farmers and innovations of scientists without having to give our agricultural future to the profit motives of foreign multinational Agri-corps. For that to happen, GM policy in Africa would have to be based around the ideals of public ownership, accountability and collaboration.

 

Potential and pitfalls

When dealing with the topic it is crucial that a proper definition of GMO’s be used. With that in mind I will use the WHO definition of “Organisms (i.e. plants, animals or microorganisms) in which the genetic material (DNA) has been altered in a way that does not occur naturally by mating and/or natural recombination… It allows selected individual genes to be transferred from one organism into another, also between nonrelated species.[1]. People have been altering crops and animals for millennia, through techniques such as selective breeding. What makes GM different is that we are altering the blueprints of the organism, its DNA, to add or remove characteristics that we may like or dislike. This is a potentially powerful technology and it is unsurprising that it provokes such strong feelings.

The Potential – Higher, healthier yields with less inputs

By inserting desirable traits into the genes of plants, there are a number of advantageous properties that could be given to plants.

First are the yields farmers get, which genetic modification can significantly increase through several avenues. Plants can be modified to be resistant to bacterial, viral or fungal diseases as well as pests, reducing the number of crops farmers loose to these scourges. In addition, plants can be given genes that allow them to withstand environmental stresses. For instance, as rains become less consistent it would be a great benefit to have crops that can withstand periods of drought or heavy rains. With climate change causing shifting weather patterns resilient crops will be critical.

The second great benefit is health, and this come about in two forms. GM crops that can be made naturally resistant to pests and infections require less pesticide, herbicide, fungicide etc. This is healthy for the farmers who would handle less chemicals, healthier for consumers as less chemical use means less of these substances being ingested, and its better for the environment as there are fewer of these chemicals getting into the wider environment and having adverse effects (e.g. water run off into rivers and lakes that causes fish deaths and algal blooms). The second possible health benefit of GM is nutritional. Through genetic modification the nutritional value of the plant can be enhanced. An example of this is yellow rice which has been modified to produce Vitamin A in order to prevent Vitamin A deficiency in children which can cause blindness.

The third broad benefit is an offshoot of the other two. By modifying plants to require less pesticide, herbicide, fungicides and fertiliser, you reduce the inputs necessary for farming. In a continent where, expensive farm inputs such as fertiliser and pesticides are a constant burden for farmers, reducing the amount of inputs required while sustaining or improving yields would give farmers a leg up without having to resort to expensive subsidies or government programs as we do now.

The Pitfalls

However, GMO’s are not all rosy. First, is the reality that “life finds a way”. Try as we may eventually GM crops will mix with and reproduce with indigenous crops. What effect will this have on the farmers who have chosen not to grow GM crops, what characteristics will these crops have, and if the GM crops are patented will they be forced to pay royalties.

Which brings us to the second issue, and in my mind the most crucial. Corporate control. Currently GM crops are largely a corporate creation, patented and controlled by large agricultural biotech corporations whose prime motivation is profit and not the interests of African farmers and consumers. Companies like Monsanto develop crops to be compatible with their own herbicide so that you only get good yields when used in conjunction with their other products. In addition, such crops tend to have terminator seeds. The seeds produced by the plants are sterile and thus farmers must purchase new seeds every year guaranteeing the company a revenue stream. Furthermore, the patents that these corporations have on these crops blocks innovation, evolution and adaption forcing farmers into farming in a specific way.

The third question is one of safety. Do we know enough about GM crops and their impacts on the environment and human health to be confident enough to allow them into the market? Do we have the systems regulations and facilities to test these crops to ensure their safety?

GMO’s with an African (policy) flavour

The answer to the issues presented by GMO’s both their potential and pitfalls, is not to completely ban them or allow agro-chemical industry free reign in the continent. What is needed is good policy. Good policy on GMO’s in Africa would consist of three elements. The first is public ownership and accountability. A major problem with GM crops is their corporate nature. The only way to ensure that GMO’s would be beneficial to Africa is to strip the profit motive from their research, design, testing and regulation. And the only way to do that is public ownership. This brings us to the second element, accountability. There is a lot of mistrust around GMO’s, the motives behind them, their ecological and health impacts and their use. The only way to assuage these concerns is transparency. No for-profit corporation will be transparent about commercially sensitive information such as its own GMO’s, but public institutions can be transparent and can be designed to be so, by incorporating stakeholders and their concerns into their design and decision-making structures to ensure that those concerns are met. The third element is collaboration. If GMO’s are truly going to be beneficial to Africa it will require collaboration on two levels. First between stakeholders within the agricultural industry, research scientists, farmers, environmentalists, doctors, consumers will all need to come together to guide the development of GM crops for the African context. A context in which small farmers are the vast majority of farmers, where climate change and changing weather patterns are making farming harder and where growing populations require more agricultural productivity to feed them. The second level is internationally. No single African country has the ability to set up and sustainably fund institutions that can design, develop, test and disseminate GM crops over the long term. However, together they could do so. The ability to pool funding, expertise, and facilities only makes sense, especially as many African countries face similar agricultural challenges and most staple and commercial crops are grown across multiple countries.

African GMO’s

GMO’s need not be a threat to Africa, they could be an opportunity. However, in their current corporate dominated form they do pose a threat. They threaten to yoke African agriculture to the profit motives of multinational Agri-biotech companies, who are not accountable to the African public or governments.

As Calestous Juma urged, Africa must do agriculture right, and to do that we have to embrace and own the science. Since Fritz Haber and Carl Bosch invented the Haber-Bosch Process in the early 20th century that allowed the production of fertiliser on an industrial scale, to Norman Borlaug and short stalk wheat in the 60s and 70s that saved millions from famine, science in agriculture is how we have fed the world. If we are to feed and develop Africa we must embrace science as part of the solution, and GMO’s as part of that. Smart policy, that is public, transparent, accountable and collaborative, would help ensure that Africa owns its GMO’s and its own agricultural destiny.

[1] http://www.who.int/foodsafety/areas_work/food-technology/faq-genetically-modified-food/en/