By Kathryn McConnell
Washington File staff writer

Washington -- A panel of international scientists May 13 endorsed the case against the European Union's (EU) moratorium on foods derived from biotechnology brought by the United States in the World Trade Organization (WTO).

"The European Union's refusal to license new biotech crops is a clear and blatant violation of its obligations under trade treaties it has signed and ratified," said Gregory Conko, director of food safety policy at the Competitive Enterprise Institute (CEI), which organized the meeting. The CEI had urged the Bush administration to take formal WTO action against the EU for several months, he said.

"More importantly, it [the moratorium] poses a genuine threat to the health and well-being of people throughout the developing world," he said. An end to "unwarranted restrictions" would help poor farmers in developing countries to fully engage in new technologies, he said.

Because of the moratorium, several developing countries have resisted adopting better-yielding biotech crops for fear of loosing European export markets, Diran Makinde, a professor at South Africa's Vinda University School of Agriculture, said at the meeting.

He said South Africa has lost sales of biotech maize to neighboring Zambia because Zambian farmers have been told that Europe would reject beef produced with biotech feed.

Another meeting participant, C.S. Prakash, a professor at Tuskegee University's Center for Plant Biotechnology Research in Alabama, said the "mindset" against agricultural biotechnology in Europe "condemns" farmers in developing countries by denying them access to technology that can help them increase their incomes and improve their families' lives.

Biotechnology gives farmers and researchers a wide choice of crop traits, Prakash said. Biotechnology crops, for example, produce higher yields, improved nutrition quality and stress-resistancies, he noted.

Prakash said he and Conko presented a declaration of support for biotechnology to U.S. Trade Representative Robert Zoellick and Agriculture Secretary Ann Veneman during a press conference earlier in the day at which they announced the WTO action. The declaration was signed by more than 4,000 scientists, Prakash said.

Biotechnology crops require fewer pesticides that are costly and labor-intensive to apply, said T.J. Buthelezi, a farmer from South Africa who has been growing biotech cotton for five years. He said at the meeting he has reduced his use of pesticides from 10 sprays per hectare to two per hectare, freeing up time for planting on more land.

The EU moratorium has resulted in a significant decrease in investment in agricultural research around the world as markets for new products remain uncertain, Ariel Alvarez-Morales, said at the meeting.

Alvarez-Morales, of Mexico's Center for Research and Advanced Studies, said "excessive and unnecessary regulations" affecting agriculture that are "based on fear" are disguised trade barriers. "If we really want to use technology to reduce hunger, we don't need more regulations," he said.

Complying with proposed regulations on labeling and traceability also would be costly to developing country farmers, the panel agreed.

Alvarez-Morales' institute is partnering with the private sector to develop a virus-resistant potato and aluminum-resistant maize, he said. New varieties of maize are needed because five million hectares in Mexico are aluminum-toxic and can't be used for farming, he said.

Mexico also wants to develop biotechnology for environmental protection reasons, Alvarez-Morales said. If farmers can grow better-yielding, more resistant crops, they would be less likely to convert forests to farmland to boost their production, he said.

Alvarez-Morales said access to biotechnology promising higher production also would help Mexico become more competitive in international agricultural markets.