GMO Debate – Kenya National Farmers’ Federation (KENAFF) Position

Several key issues define the GMO discussion in our country:

• Public knowledge and awareness
• Human health impacts
• Policy, regulatory framework and capacities
• Impacts on biodiversity and ecosystem health
• Use of agrochemicals
• Livelihoods and food security
• Resource efficiency, land productivity and adaptation
• Product labelling and consumer choices

As the National Farmers Organization in Kenya, KENAFF believes that for rational discourse about whether or not our country should make use of biotechnology, genetic engineering and/or any new technologies or scientific methods, it is necessary to have access to reliable information so that all interested parties, in the case of genetically modified crops, each and every Kenyan citizen, can make judgments and informed choices about whether the science is sound, whether they are safe and what benefits or detriments they offer. It is noteworthy that the misgivings/apprehension or acceptance of GMOs sorely lies in each individual understanding the pros as well as the cons and making informed choices.

KENAFF notes with grave concern the lack of representation of farmers in the National Biosafety Authority of Kenya Board. It is critical that the public is carried along in the development of biotechnological capabilities, possibilities, and the decisions thereof. Farmers, consumers, civil society organizations, private organizations and government institutions should all come together in the development and adoption of genetically modified crops. Checks and balances should be put in place to ensure decisions are well-informed, and fact-based.

KENAFF believes that it would have been prudent for the government to release the findings and recommendations of the Taskforce to Review Matters Relating to Genetically Modified Foods and Food Safety, to the public, premised on each Kenyan citizen’s right to have a say in a grave decision such as the lifting of the ban on open cultivation of genetically modified crops and the importation of food crops and animal feeds produced through biotechnology innovations. It should not be lost to the people of Kenya that Public Participation is one of the national values and principles of governance enshrined in the Constitution of Kenya, 2010, Article 10(2)(a).

KENAFF also notes that since there is no international consensus on the risks or benefits of the application of genetically modified technologies, it is important to provide the public with chronological information on what changes have been made or have happened, with regard to matters relating to genetically modified foods and food safety since the government issued the ban on November 8, 2012, and the decision to retract the ban on October 3, 2022, without which, the government goes against the right of the citizens of Kenya to access information required to exercise or protect any right or fundamental freedom as stipulated in Article 35 of the Constitution of Kenya.

KENAFF also notes that while a number of international organizations including WHO, FAO, WFP have given GMOs in the market a clean bill of health, the same organizations have expressed concerns over the limited regulatory frameworks and capacities in most African countries with regard to environmental and food safety risks assessments, approvals and release of transgenics as well as monitoring and surveillance. Indeed, several concerns have been raised about the implementation of the Biosafety Act, of 2009 in Kenya. These concerns relate to: the capacity within the identified government departments and agencies to implement the various provisions of the Act; and, the need to make deliberate efforts to build scientific and technological capabilities (with an emphasis on human resource development).

KENAFF notes that to achieve coherence, maximize the use of scientific capabilities and exploit the pervasive features of biotechnology, Kenya requires a body to champion biotechnology and provide clear mechanisms for restitution in the event of possible harmful effects arising from the use of GMOs. The countries that have been able to move up the technology ladder and draw economic benefits from biotechnology have established well-funded and staffed agencies dedicated to biotechnology. Further concerns are that the import regulations state that the National Biosafety Authority of Kenya may opt not to undertake risk assessment where it had granted previous approval for the import of the same genetically modified organisms from the same source. This depicts the fragility of the regulations as GMOs are sensitive, especially for environmental release.

KENAFF believes that a strong precautionary approach is necessary given our weak regulatory systems and capacities fuel public distrust. The citizens of Kenya have a right to know what is in their food and how it was produced. The government of Kenya must, as published by the NBA in 2012, adhere to the labelling regulations for food products that make direct use of GMOs at any point in their production, regardless of whether genetically modified content is detectable in the end product or not. There is indeed nothing wrong with transparency and disclosure. Indeed, transparency is a national value and principle of governance under Article 10(2)(c) of the Constitution of Kenya.

KENAFF believes that our national food system should be defined by the people who produce, distribute, and consume food. And as such, they should also control the mechanisms and policies of food production and distribution; food sovereignty. KENAFF does not advocate for increased agricultural productivity at the expense of human or animal health and environmental safety. The controversies on GMOs’ contribution to an agricultural model based on monocultures as well as inconclusive evidence on the effects or not of GMOs on human and environmental health cannot be ignored. Since there exists no international solidarity of opinion, on the benefits and risks associated with GMOs, the government of Kenya should have deliberately, and proactively promoted information dissemination within the last ten years before reaching this decision. It behoves the government, to roll out a collaborative country-wide information dissemination exercise, to inform the public on the pros and cons of genetically modified crops and indeed seek assent from the public.

KENAFF recognizes the complementary role of private companies and their leadership in developing and promoting genetically modified crops and related technologies, in line with its mission; to influence transformation and growth in the agricultural sector for enhanced food & nutrition security, improved incomes and better livelihoods for farmers, KENAFF focuses on serving her membership being small and marginal farmers who may not otherwise have access to such innovations/technologies. To this end, KENAFF shall continuously support farmers’ seed systems as they fulfil our constituent’s right to life and right to food and are central to our members’ cultures as enshrined in Article 11 of the Constitution of Kenya.

Finally, whilst KENAFF recognises that genetically modified crops and related technologies can play a role in the food, feed and nutrition crisis and insecurity in Kenya, genetically modified crops are not a “magic bullet”. Agricultural productivity, food, feed and nutrition security cannot rely on the lifting of the ban on genetically modified crops. Deliberate actions need to focus on: scaling up and sustaining a coherent public investment plan in the agriculture sector; strengthening the policy, regulatory and financial aspects of Climate Smart Agriculture; improving farming techniques, innovations and management practices; investing in a solid national irrigation infrastructure; investing in a solid national agricultural and livestock education, research and training system; enhancing the provision of targeted crop, livestock, farm forestry, fisheries and aquaculture extension services; improved local markets; supporting establishment of better storage facilities; ensuring effective supply chains; building the capacity of and empowering farmers; and, nurturing favourable agricultural policies.