Non-food crops play an essential role as fuel, fodder, building materials and countless domestic and industrial processes that are derived from products of vegetable origin, both cultivated and wild. This edition of the Biotechnology and Development Monitor focuses on the issue of the genetic modification (GM) of non-food crops. Present and future demand for raw material has been an important factor in determining research agendas and investment strategies within the agricultural and forestry sectors. At the moment biotechnology is being applied to key crops such as trees, cotton and tobacco. With non-food crops, GM aims predominantly at the production of plant material for large monocropping systems.

Much public concern has focused on the long-term effect GM food might have on human health. In this discussion the impact of non-food crops has been largely ignored. Even though they may not be consumed directly as food, some still find their way into the food chain. A good example of this is cotton, of which the husks and oil are worked into animal feed. Now that the European Union has banned the use of animal remains in fodder because of the BSE crisis, there is a growing demand for new sources. Whether eaten or not, transgenic non-food crops have environmental and socioeconomic impacts just as food crops. However, most regulations focus on food crops and products so there are few labelling systems in place that would enable consumers to choose between GM and non-GM wood or cotton derived products.

The development of GM crops has been mostly driven by industrial demand. The growing consumption of paper and timber has given an impetus for the development of GM trees tailored to the needs of plantation forestry, as Rautner explains. Such monocultures are well known for their negative impact on biodiversity, native forest ecosystems and the livelihoods of local people. For example, plantations with faster growing exotic varieties, such as eucalyptus, require more water whether they are genetically modified or not. Water is often a scarce commodity, and plantation forestry can have impacts on the surrounding water management.

The long-term effects of GM trees and other non-food crops are difficult to assess. Trees, for example, are particularly difficult to monitor. Often grown in

isolated areas, they live much longer than annual crops and unwanted traits may only appear after several generations. Preventing cross contamination with wild species is a problem and trees have ingenious ways of propagating themselves over long distances. Sterility technology has yet to be perfected and some doubt whether it is wise to try.

GM cotton further demonstrates the dilemmas of introducing gene technology into farming. In contrast to GM trees that are still at an experimental stage, cotton is spreading rapidly around the world and was grown on 5.3 million hectares in 2000. In the USA, about 72 per cent of all cotton is transgenic; in China it makes up about 10 per cent. In other countries, the line between commercialization and field trials is sometimes unclear.

As a replacement to chemical intensive methods of cultivation, GM cotton may appear to be extremely attractive in countries such as India with a vibrant textile industry, where cotton growing is often in the hands of small-scale farmers. Smallholders are particularly vulnerable to crop failure and bankruptcy and, as Sharma explains, Indian cotton farmers often get into serious financial difficulties because of the expense involved in conventional cotton cultivation.

shows that, even though experiences sometimes appear contradictory, cultivating GM cotton has its problems. There are suggestions of varying degrees of insect resistance, and some even question whether there are, in fact, significant

savings in the amount of chemicals required to produce GM cotton. To slow down the build-up of resistance, additional practices are advocated like growing a certain percentage of non-GM cotton plants in the fields.

One area of concern is the difficulty in obtaining comparative data on GM crops. Information on the research being carried out, the extent GM varieties have been introduced into the environment, and the way they are being monitored, have not been systematized and are therefore fragmented. This poses a huge capacity building challenge for the effective implementation of the Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety, which requires globally comprehensive and accessible information on GMOs.

Examples both of Bulgaria by Kruszewska and of Canada by Schmeiser show that unclear regulation and lack of containment of GM crops is not only an environmental problem. In a world market that demands segregation between GM and non-GM crops and labelling of GM products, individual farmers as well as whole nations could lose valuable export markets.

Gene technology requires control at a political level. However, in many developing and transitional economies, political instability, lack of good governance, a desperate need for foreign exchange and widespread poverty make it difficult to exercise either caution or control. Stakeholders in this situation certainly need the assistance of international regulatory bodies and measures.