THE FAO ELECTRONIC FORUM ON BIOTECHNOLOGY IN FOOD AND AGRICULTURE: A BRIEF SUMMARY OF THE FORESTRY CONFERENCE¹

by

Alvin Yanchuk²
Senior Scientist, Research Branch
British Columbia Ministry of Forestry, Victoria, Canada

The area of biotechnology in agriculture has created many questions about man's role in modifying the basic structure of organisms in relation to food supplies and their impacts on agricultural and wild-land ecosystems. Developments in biotechnology in forestry are somewhat behind agriculture but major advances are nevertheless being made. However, many questions about the appropriateness of biotechnology in agriculture are now being posed to the forestry community.

Within the framework of a series of two-month e-mail conferences on biotechnologies in food and agriculture, including the crop, fisheries, forestry and animal sectors, FAO recently organized an Electronic Forum on Biotechnology in Forestry, with special reference to developing countries. These forums were designed to enable a wide range of parties, including governmental and non-governmental organisations, policy makers and the general public, to discuss and exchange views and experiences about specific issues concerning biotechnologies in food and agriculture. The forestry conference, "How appropriate are currently available biotechnologies for the forestry sector in developing countries," was held from 25 April to 29 June 2000.

Nearly 170 individuals registered for this second conference, which ran shortly after the conference on crop biotechnology. Thirty-two messages were posted and a majority (88%) of the participants were from developed countries. The 32 submissions were written by 15 individuals (9% of all registered) from 10 countries. Genetic modification (GM) of trees was by far the biotechnology of greatest interest in the discussions, but molecular genetics and tissue culture were also discussed many times. Developments in tissue culture and molecular genetics were largely considered to be extensions of currently acceptable and well-known practices.

Below are some of the main points that were made during the conference.

a) The point was made several times that modern biotechnology should only be realistically developed for species which already have a substantial infrastructure in basic plantation technology (e.g. in seed collection, nursery techniques, silviculture and in tree breeding and related research) and thus that it should be an enhancement to classical breeding rather than its substitute.

b) The long generation time of most forest trees will likely be an important difference in the wide-scale development and application of GM technology to trees compared with crop species. For example, patents may only provide protection for a finite time period (e.g. 20 years), but biotechnology patents applied to trees may expire prior to the trees being harvested. On the contrary, if payments for the use of biotechnology are made at the development stage, then substantial economic benefits must be present in order to carry the costs of the investments. The long economic rotations of most trees also raised concern about the risk of pathogens developing resistance to GM trees. However, it was also pointed out that because of the long time period required to develop and use GM trees, the forestry sector should have more time to monitor and correct trends/policies regarding GM trees than the crop sector with GM crops.

Participants argued that the use of GM trees in developing countries would largely be limited to trees that are harvested in a relatively short period of time (e.g., 10 years of age), such as those grown in intensive plantation forestry (e.g. Eucalyptus in South America or Africa, short rotation Populus). Only for species with relatively short rotation-ages, it was predicted that investments in biotechnology might be profitable. As well, testing should be more reliable with short-rotation species, as expression of the GM trait can be tested and monitored for the expected rotation time.

c) There was a clear consensus that many factors need to be considered in deciding whether or not any biotechnology is appropriate in forestry (i.e., biological, economical, and political restraints and opportunities). Therefore it was not easy to say that modern biotechnology is either appropriate or not appropriate for developing countries.

d) Many of the messages touched on the fact that there was much substantial public awareness and concern regarding the risks and benefits of biotechnology. It was discussed several times that there is a greater need for the public to be informed about these technologies, and how they could be applied to specific situations in forestry, before they should or will be used.

e) Several of the issues that might have been expected to have been debated (e.g. ownership/control of biotechnologies; the ability of developing countries to regulate and monitor the use of biotechnology products or the potential impact of Bacillus thuriengensis toxins on other organisms ), were either not discussed or were discussed to a far lesser degree than in the crop conference. This was probably due to the higher level of application of GM technology in the crop sector today compared to forestry, where no GM trees have yet been commercially released.

A range of other topics was also discussed in the conference and these can be followed by consulting the actual messages posted on the FAO homepage or reading the Long Version of the Summary Document which should be posted soon at the above Internet site. Hard copies of these documents are available to readers of Forest Genetic Resources who do not have easy Internet connections, upon request to FAO.