The Situation in Bulgaria
The
Biotech War
The official position
The official position
NGOs challenge
Who will pay the costs?
Risks for Bulgarian agriculture
Bulgaria - target for corporations
What now for Bulgarian agriculture?
New history
Statistics
The Biotech War
Bulgaria
- torn between US and EU
First releases of GMOs in Bulgaria
Commercial cultivation of GMO maize
Bulgaria: Torn between US Seed Producers and EU Consumer Demands
Bulgaria is today caught in a war between the U.S. corporate seed producers, like Monsanto and Pioneer, targeting farmers with their genetically modified (GM) maize seeds, and the corporate food processors and commodity traders who want to buy GM-free products for the EU market. This article examines how this situation arose and what might be the implications for Bulgaria's agricultural economy and EU membership.
Bulgaria, with a population of some 8.0 million, lies on the Balkan peninsular of South-East Europe. Agriculture plays an important role in its economy. In the North, the black soils support the cultivation of corn, vines and fruit trees, while in the more mountainous regions potatoes, tobacco and flax are grown. Along the Danube plain, the most important crops are corn, sunflowers, sugar beet and grapes.
During the authoritarian rule of the communist regime, all agriculture was managed by State collective farms. Since 1991, the collectives are being privatised and land is being returned to former owners. The economic recession of the 1990s has also hit agriculture, reflected in the drop in the percentage of working population employed in agriculture, down from 13,5% in 1990 to 8,1% of the in 1998. Livestock and cereal production are both down by some 40% since 1990. The main agricultural exports are tobacco and wine.
The First Releases of GMOs in Bulgaria
Bulgaria has a history of tinkering with genetic engineering. Already in 1991, transgenic tobacco plants were the first genetically modified organsims (GMOs) released in the Balkan region. In the mid-1990s, extensive field trials of virus- and bacteria-resistant tobacco, as well as GM alfalfa, were being undertaken at the Institute of Genetic Engineering (IGE) in Kostinbrod. As recently as March 2000, Bulgarian scientists were still claiming that the greatest progress has been achieved with GM tobacco, whose traits include resistance to viruses, including the mosaic virus, fungal and bacterial diseases, extemes of temperature and tolerance to herbicides and heavy metals. Other GM plants being developed include: alfalfa, grapes, sunflowers and tomatoes.
As early as 1997, Prof. Atanas Atanssov, the chief proponent of ag-biotech in Bulgaria and head of the IGE in Kostinbrod, was boasting to the media that Bulgaria that GM tobacco would be commercialised in 1998. This story of imminent commercialisation of GM tobacco was picked up by Reuters and reached the major buyers of Bulgarian tobacco: Phillip Morris, British-Amercian Tobacco and Reemtsma, who reacted by threatening to stop buying Bulgarian tobacco if the country went ahead with its commercialisation.
Information on the cultivation of GM plants in Bulgaria from official sources, is almost impossible to access, but without information, all Bulgarian crops becomes suspect. Clearly, the lesson of GM tobacco was not learnt, as the story of the GM maize fiasco illustrates.
Commercial Cultivation of Genetically Modified Maize
In 1999, Bulgarian farmers harvested the first crop of genetically modified (GM) herbicide-tolerant and pest-resistant maize. That year, Monsanto’s GM maize was grown on at least 12,000 hectares. Farmers bought the GM maize seeds from local seed distributors, after aggressive marketing campaigns by Monsanto and Pioneer, the transnational 'life sciences' companies that produce them. Pioneer's 1999 Seed Catalogue, available from seed distributors, first introduced Bulgarian farmers to GM maize hybrids, by publicising the yields achieved on a farm in Dobrich. The 2000 Seed Catalogue offered farmers the following varieties of GM maize seed:
- Clearfield – tolerant to Imidazolinon-based herbicides, whose trade names are ‘Pivot’ and ‘Escort’;
- Liberty Link maize – tolerant to the glufosinate-based herbicide, Liberty made by AgrEvo
- Maisgard – Bt corn which is resistant to the corn borer. A note in the catalogue warns farmers to provide ‘refuges’ of Bt-free maize and suggests that they attend seminars to learn more;
- Combined Maisgard and Liberty-Link maize seed, although it carries a warning that herbicide-resistance may not always be evident.
Seed offers for the 2000 sowing season from another seed distributor revealed that Monsanto's Roundup Ready maize seeds were also on sale to farmers at a price of US$ 907 for a package containing 5 packets of seeds (each containing 80,000-100,000 seeds) and 30 litres of Roundup. There were no restrictions on the amount of seeds that farmers could buy and sow. The only records of areas under GM maize, may be with the transnational seed companies, since seed distributors maintain records of the farmers that are buying GM seeds, and in what quantities.
An interview with one Bulgarian farmer near Sevlievo, who has grown Monsanto's RR maize on his collective farm for two consecutive years, revealed that he has no contracts with Monsanto and that the GM maize harvest was used for animal feed.
The Official Position - only Field Trials
Official information reveals that since 1998, three companies: Monsanto, Pioneer and Novartis, have applied for permits to commercialise transgenic crops which are either herbicide tolerant (to Roundup and Basta), resistant to corn borers (Bt) or combined herbicide and corn borer resistant.
These applications would have been made to the Council for Safe Use of Genetically Engineered Higher Plants, which issues permits for environmental releases of GMOs, both for research and commercial purposes. However, this information is considered top secret and is not publicly available.
The Council was established on the basis of 1996 regulations, which themselves are based on a law from 1958 on Seeds and Seed Material. As in the USA - Bulgaria's mentor on biotech matters - parliament was by-passed. The Council is chaired by the Minister of Agriculture and the Executive Secretary is Prof. Atanassov. Other members include officials and scientists.
According to the 1996 Regulations, the Council maintains registers of releases of GMOs both for research and commercial purposes. However, in Bulgaria, information in these registers is considered a State secret. Council members and anyone else involved in the work of the Council are required to sign a statement of administrative confidentiality.
Prof. Atanassov, Executive Secretary of the Council and head of the Institute of Genetic Engineering in Kostinbrod, was quoted in the press in early 2000, as saying that in 1999, Monsanto had signed contracts with Bulgarian farmers to sow 12,000 hectares with GM herbicide tolerant and insect-resistant maize. He claims that in 1999 these were just field trials, but a Council meeting in March 2000 would decide whether to permit the commercialisation of GM maize.
By the time the Council met in March 2000, ANPED, an NGO network, working with the Bulgarian NGO, EcoSouthWest, had undertaken a mapping of the situation with commercialisation of GMOs in Bulgaria and had attempted to meet with members of the Council - mainly, without success. The outcome of this March meeting of the Council was a decision to increase the area under GM maize to 20,000 hectares, but not to permit commercial cultivation. However, this decision was never enforced, because the Council has no executive powers. The representative of the Environment Ministry on this Council recently admitted that "there is not enough control", which means that the GM maize seeds already available from seed distributors in March 2000, were not recalled.
The March Council meeting also agreed to permit field trials of Bt potatoes. However, some members of the Council dispute that permits were given for growing any Bt crops, including Bt maize - even though Pioneer's Bt maize was being advertised in its 2000 seed catalogues. Given the absence of executive powers, any decisions made by the Council are indeed meaningless.
However, both Atanassov and other members of the Council continue to claim that the 1999 and 2000 cultivation of GM maize was solely for field trials, and that the harvest was segregated and destroyed. Other Council members claim that Monsanto and Pioneer buy back the GM harvest from farmers, but this is refuted by the farmers who grew the GM maize, who say that they used the GM maize for animal fodder.
NGOs challenge the legal status of the Council
EcoSouthWest, along with two other Bulgarian environmental groups recently filed papers challenging the legal status of the 1996 regulation and the Council. This followed the launch of a joint ANPED-EcoSouthWest report, "Bulgaria: The Corporate European Playground for Genetically Engineered Food and Agriculture", that finally prompted a public debate on this issue. The stranglehold of Monsanto on Bulgarian scientists and officials was clearly evident when they infiltrated the NGO press conference in Sofia, held to release the report in May 2000. In an attempt to discredit the report, Prof. Atanassov brought with him to the press conference, a farmer and a seed distributor from Sevlievo (300 kms away) that NGOs had interviewed for the report, to refute their earlier statements.
The status of the Council on Safe Use of GE Higher Plants is poorly defined in Bulgarian legislation. On the one hand, this Council seems to be a separate authority, whose responsibility includes the issuing of permits, but on the other hand, it is not listed as a separate agency within the government. Hence, no one in government is directly responsible for controlling GM activities. So, a demand to this Council for information could be refused on the grounds that it is not explicitly a State institution and is not on the list of Ministries that should provide information to the public. A direct appeal for information to the Minister of Agriculture could also be turned down, because he does not hold this information and indeed, does not issue the permits.
In May 2000, three Bulgarian NGOs filed court papers challenging the legal status of the Council on Safe Use of GE Higher Plants on four counts:
- The Regulation, that established the Council, is based on the Seed and Seeds Material Act from 1958, which does not contain provisions for:
- the granting of permits for releasing Genetically Modified Higher Plants;
- the creation of the Council for Safe Use of Genetically Modified Higher Plants
- the Minister of the Agriculture to issue a regulation enabling the creation of an authority to grant permits for the release of genetically modified higher plants".
- In 1958, when the Seed and Seed Material Act was introduced, geneticists were considered “enemies of the communist regime” and were often interned in psychiatric clinics, especially in the Soviet Union, hence the 1996 Regulations are not in the spirit of the Seed Act
- The Regulation contravenes the Law on Normative Acts because it does not implement the whole Act on Seed and Seed Material, but only a part of it.
- The Council is not an Administrative Authority, according to the Administrative Act.
Who will pay the additional costs of GM agriculture?
The tacit acceptance of the cultivation of GM crops by the Bulgarian Government and its administration, could have severe economic repercussions not only on Bulgarian farmers, but also on animal feed producers, the animal husbandry industry, the starch and processed food industries and traders, including grain traders and those specialising in the export of Bulgarian food and animal products.
If Bulgaria continues on the route of GM agriculture, but wants to meet the demands of the EU market by providing GM-free crops and food, the following measures need to be undertaken throughout the production chain:
- Additional investment in farm and grain storage capacity to enable segregation of crops after harvest and during storage to ensure no cross-contamination of GM and non-GM. This would need to be enforced and controlled by an authority with sufficient credibility to satisfy buyers of GM-free, especially those exporting to the EU.
- Additional investment in laboratory infrastructure to enable testing and certification of GM-free. To be able to guarantee GM-free, all the players along the production chain – farmers, food processors, exporters - will need to certify their products as GM-free
- Additional investment in labelling. EU legislation requires that all products containing GM material be labelled accordingly.
Who is going to bear the additional costs of GM agriculture? Certainly not Monsanto or Pioneer. If farmers, food processors and exporters pass on these costs to the consumer, the higher price of GM food is likely to lead to consumer discrimination against GM. Or, they might consider absorbing the additional costs of testing and labelling and accepting lower profit margins. However, for those Bulgarian farmers who are already struggling to survive, this could well spell bankruptcy. Or they could ignore all the requirements for labelling and testing and risk losing the EU market.
Playing ‘Russian Roulette’ with Bulgarian Agriculture
In the long term, the commercialisation of GM crops could have severe impacts on biodiversity and human health. More immediately, the cultivation of GM maize in Bulgaria, the lack of segregation of GM maize from non-GM and thus traceability, threaten to destroy Bulgaria's export market for maize derivatives and fodder.
Food products containing GMOs are already highly likely on the market. Most of the GM maize harvested in 1999 and 2000 was probably used for animal feed and thus entered the human food chain, via meat and dairy products. The GM maize was not kept separate from the conventional crop. Meanwhile, EU-based food-processing companies, such as the Belgian starch company Amylum and grain handlers, like UK's Glencore, wanting to buy Bulgarian maize and maize derivatives, such as starch and corn syrup have already implemented purchasing policies that require GM certification and labelling. These cannot be guaranteed. Can Bulgaria, with its weak economy, afford to play “Russian roulette” with its customers worldwide? Why is Bulgaria offering itself as the European playground for GE experiments to corporations, like Monsanto and Pioneer?
Bulgaria is today just a pawn in the corporate biotech war, caught between the corporate seed producers, like Monsanto and Pioneer, and the corporate food processors and commodity traders who want to buy GM-free products for the EU market. Yet, the only active Bulgarian player in the game is a genetic engineer. "Where is the agriculture Ministry to defend Bulgarian agronomic interests? Where is the environment Ministry to protect biodiversity or the health Ministry to protect public health?", asks Kalin Anastasov, President of EcoSouthWest. "Unless there is some Government intervention and democratic control of this technology, all Bulgarians stand to lose – farmers, food processors, exporters and consumers", he adds.
But, the Bulgarian government plays into the hands of the transnationals by excluding the public, including all the other stakeholders, who are totally unaware of what is going on. There is no legislation in place to ensure public access to information on releases of GMOs or labelling of GM food. There are no procedures in place to enable the public to participate in decisions concerning genetic activities. If Bulgarian scientists and officials believe that by withholding information, they can prevent a rejection of Bulgarian agricultural exports by EU buyers on the grounds of GMO contamination, they are mistaken. On the contrary, the lack of information could lead to greater scepticism on the part of grain traders, animal feed producers and the food derivatives and processed food industry, buying Bulgarian agricultural products.
Companies producing for the local Bulgarian market are also unable to avoid the implications of GM agriculture. Bulgaria is in the second-round of EU accession countries. In line with EU harmonisation measures, companies wanting to put GM food on the market will be required to get government approvals and to label it. Even if Bulgaria got a temporary exemption from the EU to delay the introduction of EU labelling, the absence of labelling would limit opportunities for exports. Another question that arises with respect to Bulgaria's EU accession is the fate of GMOs that have been commercialised in Bulgaria, but have not been approved in the EU.
Why was Bulgaria targeted by the corporations?
From research undertaken in countries, such as Poland and Hungary, it is known that TNCs, like Monsanto and AgrEvo, were reluctant to undertake GM experiments in the complete absence of any laws. In addition, countries in the first round of EU Accession, such as Poland and Hungary, were protected from the worst corporate excesses by the fact that they would be expected to harmonise their regulations with those of the EU.
Bulgaria by contrast, has only recently been invited to join the EU. While Bulgaria boasts that in 1996, it became the first country in Central and Eastern Europe to establish regulations for biosafety of GM higher plants, this was most likely the very cue that the corporations were waiting for. This gave them a legal basis for starting field trials of transgenic varieties of plants - the first steps to commercialisation - which generally last three years, and after which they would expect approval for commercialisation.
What now for Bulgarian agriculture?
The launch of an NGO campaign to build public awareness of GM food and agriculture in Bulgaria is already starting to bear fruit. Within a month of releasing the report, "Bulgaria: The Corporate European Playground for Genetically Engineered Food and Agriculture", in May 2000, the head of the parliamentary Environment Committee, Mr. Toshev called for a moratorium on the commercialisation of GMOs. However, Committee members rejected this proposal because it would confirm that Bulgarian farmers were already growing GM crops commercially. Instead, they agreed to cut all government funding for research and development of GM tobacco and vines, these being the most important agricultural exports. However, no action was taken on the dissemination of GM maize seeds to Bulgarian farmers, despite the fact that Pioneer's maize has not been approved in the EU. Hence any exports of this maize to the EU, would be rejected. Much still remains to be done to ensure regulatory oversight of GM activities in Bulgaria, since there is still no comprehensive GMO law and no government control. Moreover, until the Supreme Administrative Court issues their decision on the legality of the Council approving releases of GM plants, the chaos and anarchy that currently characterise Bulgaria regulation of GMOs, as well as the complete absence of information, will continue to prevail.
New History
April, 2000 - M-r Lachezar Toshev, chief of Parliamentary Commission of Environment and Waters, proposes a moratorium over releases and dissemination of GMOs in Bulagria.
June, 2000 - M-r Toshev withdraws the proposal for moratorium over GMOs and the National Assembly of Bulgaria adopted a conception,containing recommendations to the Council of Ministers, restricting GMO activities in the country:
- Recommends, that Council of Ministers will in short terms, prepare GMO – draft, which will be publicly discussed
- the new draft law will implement EU directives including their last revisions
- establishment of administrative and scientific control over GMO activities
- analyses of health impacts
- market analyses / decisions made only by National Assembly /
- ban on use of antibiotic marker genes
- register of importers, producers and buyers of GE products - available for the public. Control and punishment measures
- labelling of GM species and products
- aplication of GM tobacco and vines in Bulgarian agriculture – prohibited
- GMO draft law - submitted to the biosafety protocol
- public access to all information concerning GMOs
- take into account the mutagenesis problem in GMOs
2. Punishment measures for people that break GMO law
3. Accept the concept of Minister Varbanov, that commercialisation of GMOs will be prohibited until adoption of the new GMO law
4. Abolish secrecy about GMO activities
5. All GMO production available to be exported and strictly controled
6. Ministry of Economy will assess the impact on markets inside and outside the country, posed by indroduction of GMOs in Bulgarian agriculture
7. Ministry of Environment and Waters will prepare the Biosafety Convention for ratification by the National Assembly, include parts of it in the new biodiverstiy law and assess the impact on the environment of introduction of GMOs
8. The chief of the group responsible for the Bulgaria – EU negotiations will provide the translation of EU – GMO directives and propose a coception, how they will be applied in the country
9. Minister of Finances will provide the budget for the implementation of the new GMO draft law
- EU - Parliamentary commission will also take into account the new darft law
10 votes in favor
1 vote against
22.06.2000
L.Toshev
July, 2000 – Bulgarian Parliament ratified the Biosafety Protocol
August, 2000 - a Regulation for labelling food contains of GM soya and Maize adopoted by the Council of Ministers
