Farm Tender

SA GM moratorium - Over to you Government

This article is bought to you by SureSeason

By Tim Burrow.

The result of an independent review into the cultivation of genetically modified (GM) crops was announced recently by the South Australian Government. The review evaluated the benefits and costs of the GM moratorium to the South Australian economy and agricultural industries. The report will inform policy decisions regarding GM food crops in South Australia.

There has been a moratorium on GM crop production in and transportation of GM crop products through South Australia since 2003. In the fifteen years that have elapsed since the moratorium was first imposed, the policy has been re-considered and renewed three times (in 2008, 2014 and 2017). As currently legislated, the moratorium is to apply through to 2025.

Meanwhile, all other mainland states have allowed their farmers to grow GM crops; Tasmania is the only holdout, with a moratorium in place. At the same time, the area sown to GM crop varieties globally has grown from zero in 1995 to 13% of the world’s total cropland.

Ad
 - Take some of the risk out of Farming. Click here to contact SureSeason, they have an excellent Multi Peril Crop Insurance product - Ad

On face value, the government’s moratorium has little downside. It has certainly has been presented as being a no-brainer for those who believe in a clean, green future for the state; and anyone who has questioned the wisdom of this decision has been depicted as red-necked and evil.

Not surprisingly, nothing is that simple.

We’ve heard a lot about our clean green brand, and about the benefits a ban on GM products brings. We’re told that our farmers get a price premium for their products on the basis of the fact that customers value our GM free status.

If, as some would have us believe, there is a price premium already being paid for the fact that we are GMO-free, where is the proof of that claim?

Apart from one specific exception, the report found there was no evidence to justify a view that any current price premium or market access for non-GM South Australian crops would be diminished if GM food crops were allowed to be grown in the state on condition of careful segregation. The exception related to Kangaroo Island.

Ad
 - Take some of the risk out of Farming. Click here to contact SureSeason, they have an excellent Multi Peril Crop Insurance product - Ad

This supports the finding of research undertaken on behalf of the Tasmanian government when that state’s moratorium was last reviewed. This research and advice clearly concluded that, while there were some small market segments which may have achieving some minor price advantage, these were the exception rather than the rule.

So, when the rest of the world has access to the best available seeds, fertilisers, grass varieties, etc, saying ‘no, we won’t have a bar of them’ might make local consumers feel good. However, that’s pretty much all it will do. In the longer term, it will make many farmers - and industry sectors - unviable.

The vast bulk of product grown by our farmers is in commodity products that are shipped in bulk to markets across the country and the world. They are not branded as South Australian products. Often, they are mixed with product from other suppliers and could not be branded even if we wanted to go down that path.

Our participation in these bulk markets is based on our farmers keeping their costs of production below the price that buyers will pay. That in turn means using the most productive and efficient inputs - whatever they may be.

The recent Review considered three policy options, viz (a) maintaining, or (b) modifying, or (c) removing the current state moratorium on GM food crop production and transport. In considering these options, the researcher undertook a comprehensive review of the situation in other countries, as well as how the moratorium has played out for our state’s farmers. It sets out 19 recommendations that should form the basis of future policy-making.

Ad
 - Take some of the risk out of Farming. Click here to contact SureSeason, they have an excellent Multi Peril Crop Insurance product - Ad

It concludes that, on the basis of the evidence it examined, there was little if any evidence of marketing and trade advantages of staying GM-free and suggests that the state would be a net beneficiary if the moratorium was removed.

The ball is now in the government’s court. It has the expert and independent advice it sought, and must now move to implement the review’s findings.