|
THIS
week, there have been several venues for discussing the
future of the Philippine economy, as the national income
accounts reports for the third quarter are being
released; as the exporters, representing one of the main
planks of economic growth, are continuing their
agitation for government intervention as they reel under
the impact of an appreciating peso; and as the
agriculture sector leads in the observance of National
Biotechnology Week.
Much has
been said about the outlook for the first two; the third
deserves renewed, focused attention. Why? The case was
clearly yet crisply laid by Agriculture Undersecretary
Emmanuel Paras in his keynote speech on Monday at the
opening of the weeklong observance. According to him,
biotechnology holds the key to most of the country’s
survival issues in these critical times, when adverse
weather conditions—“climate change” is the phrase on
everyone’s lips since Al Gore produced his award-winning
documentary—are wreaking havoc on agricultural
production, human settlements and livelihood that rely
on natural resources, among other things. Being from the
Department of Agriculture (DA), Mr. Paras, of course,
zeroed in on production and food security. For one, he
cited the contribution of biotechnology in helping
attain food security “while farm and fishery resources
steadily dwindle in the face of a constantly growing
population.”
With the
support of some multinational research and funding
institutions and a still-dismayingly narrow
private-sector bloc, government scientists and
agriculturists are in the middle of a thus-far
successful program to develop more outstanding crop
varieties and appropriate technologies.
Over the
past few years, the DA as well as the Department of
Science and Technology (DOST) have, in fact, been
steadily but surely building up their laboratories and
related facilities for biotechnology and all related
disciplines, in recognition of its dizzyingly wide array
of applications in human life—besides food,
biotechnology offers certain answers to urgent issues in
health, energy and environment conservation.
Actually, applications in these areas have, for the
longest time, been proven beneficial to man, locally and
globally. Simply put, biotechnology has provided people
the means to provide food, clothing and shelter for
themselves while minimizing the impact of such “resource
drawdowns” on the planet. The much-maligned transgenic
crops have allowed millions of people in Third World
countries, especially in Africa, to avert famine and
death as improved crop qualities, say, those resistant
to extreme weather and to disease while fortified with
more nutrients. The net effect: higher yields, healthier
people and less toxic impact on the environment as the
levels of chemicals used as fertilizer and pesticide are
correspondingly reduced.
Unfortunately, there have been setbacks in the herculean
efforts of talented, idealistic Filipino scientists at
the DOST, DA and related agencies. Over the past few
years there has been a constant campaign to discredit
transgenic crops and simplistically paint them all as
the handiwork of big business, especially huge
multinational companies like Monsanto. Yet, to
sweepingly paint biotech adherents as stooges of this or
that business is to ignore the endless opportunities for
improving the human condition that their work offers. We
still believe a reasonable line can be drawn—on the
hard, fraud-proof template of pure science by
independent parties from both sides of the debate—to
ferret out the truth about questions of “risk” without
needlessly stopping the drive to push the frontiers of
knowledge.
It is
hoped that in the next few years, more parties in the
private sector, especially the local business, will see
the tremendous economic possibilities in investing in
biotechnology given the enviable, but quickly declining,
stock of human talent here: Are these businesses waiting
for every talented Pinoy scientist to be poached? It is
hoped that in the near future also, we can grow the
small group of idealistic, talented enterprises that
have made it their mission to broker science and
business with a view to pushing more investments in
technology that both make the financiers happy while
improving people’s lives—to cite an example, the
pioneering work of the Cambridge-trained Filipino Ms.
Maoi Arroyo comes to mind.
If
policymakers and leaders in the private sector are
serious about looking for areas for growth in the
economy, they need not look far. They just have to track
what the pioneers in the science and agriculture
communities have been doing, and find gems for life
there. In biotechnology may be found, for instance, one
venue for economic growth that can be leapfrogged,
because in many areas it will not require tremendous
financial resources for building the appropriate
infrastructure. In fact, if the early biotech success
stories and best practices were reviewed, one would see
that offhand, the key is in matching the right parties
and technologies with the right investor or support
institution.
Abaca,
the world-acclaimed twine that has such diverse uses,
has made a remarkable comeback the past few years,
thanks to biotech. There’s word that Pinoy biotech is
quickly catching up with leader India in producing crop
strains that not only are resistant to disease and
extreme weather, but also solve marketing problems
because of their delayed-ripening traits. And of course,
biotech experts are now being harnessed in the search
for green energy, as nations seek to meet demands for
biofuels without jeopardizing food security or even, as
a recent Bloomberg special report on bioethanol’s
problems in Brazil has illustrated, worsening health and
environment as an undesirable consequence.
The
opportunities for bettering life are long, as this
week’s observance of Biotech Week is showing; but so
also are the challenges—in terms of mustering political
will to provide enough resources and crafting correct
policy that’s not hostage to rent-seekers; in terms of
setting the right regulatory framework for
biotech-related research and businesses; and in terms of
boosting the role of matchmakers like Hybridigm that
provide crucial bridges between business and science.
The DA
has gotten a bad rap the past three years, no thanks to
such episodes as the fertilizer scam and such names as
Joc-joc Bolante, but in this one area—biotechnology—it
deserves appreciation. These days, the current chief is
being held to account for committing millions of
hectares of Philippine farmlands to Chinese firms. Maybe
Secretary Yap, who is aware of biotechnology’s promise,
would be better off tapping its potential for improving
human welfare than allowing, for cash, the lease of
vital farmlands. |
