Biotechnology and Indonesian’s Food Sovereignty

INTER-RELATION BETWEEN SOCIOECONOMIC, LEGAL, POLICIES AND BIOTECHNOLOGY:The Indonesian experience with biotech crops

Agus Pakpahan

KETUA KOMISI

KEAMANAN HAYATI PRODUK REKAYASA GENETIK

JAKARTA, NOPEMBER 2014

Note: This topic had been delivered in HIGH LEVEL POLICY DIALOGUE AGRICULTURAL BIOTECHNOLOGY (HLPDAB)

APEC WORKSHOP

ON THE PLANT BIOTECHNOLOGY LIFE CYCLE

SEPTEMBER 14, 15

Beijing, China

I WOULD LIKE TO SHARE...1. REVISITING PAST INDONESIAN

AGRICULTURE: What knowledge can we learn from Green Revolution experience?

2. What ARE OUR MAJOR PROBLEM NOW AND OUR POTENTIALS FOR OUR FUTURE, LET’S SAY 2045?

3. WHAT, WHERE, WHO AND HOW BIOTECHNOLOGY WILL HELP US?

4. CLOSING REMARKS

II. REVISITING PAST INDONESIAN AGRICULTURE: What can we learn from Green Revolution?

PAST PROBLEMS

• POPULATION

PAST DECISION AND

SOLUTION

BIG PUSHED RICE PRODUCTION:

RICE SELF-SUFFICIENCY IN 1983EXPONENTIAL POPULATION

GROWTH !

INDONESIA’S RICE SELF SUFFICIENCY IN 1984,

AFTER ABOUT 15 YEARS OF DEVELOPMENT

What Happened after Rice Self

Sufficiency Goal Was Achieved?

• Take off issue replacing food self-suffiency

and poverty issues

• Industrialization interpreted as building

factories

• Missing link between agriculture and

industrialization

• Liberalization of the economy

• Declining position of agriculture

Agricultural Relative Development

Index (Liu et., al. 2009)

G1 = agric GDP; L1= Agric Labor

G2 = national GDP; L2 = national labor

Source: International Food

Policy Research Institute

(IFPRI, 2013)

Rank Country 1990 1995 2000 2005 2013

1 Albania 9.2 6.0 7.8 6.1 5.2

1 Mauritius 8.5 7.6 6.5 5.9 5.2

3 Uzbekistan – 8.3 9.3 6.6 5.3

4 Panama 11.6 10.8 11.4 9.0 5.4

4 South Africa 7.2 6.5 7.4 7.7 5.4

6 China 13.0 10.4 8.4 6.7 5.5

6 Malaysia 9.5 7.1 6.9 5.8 5.5

6 Peru 16.3 12.3 10.5 9.9 5.5

9 Thailand 21.3 17.1 10.2 6.6 5.8

10 Colombia 10.4 8.0 6.8 6.9 5.9

GLOBAL HUNGER INDEX(GHI), 10 LOWEST GHI DEVELOPING

COUNTRIES INDEX

(Note: GHI < or = 5.0 is GHI of Developed Countries)

Note: GHI < 5.0 held by developed countries

Position of Indonesia’s GHI

1990 1996 2000 2005 2013

20 Moldova – 7.7 8.8 7.3 9.2

21 Georgia – 16.6 9.2 11.3 9.3

22 Nicaragua 24.1 19.9 15.4 11.5 9.5

23 Indonesia 19.7 16.9 15.5 14.6 10.1

23 Paraguay 9.3 7.5 6.5 6.3 10.1

25 Mongolia 19.7 23.6 18.5 14.1 10.8

26 Bolivia 18.8 16.9 14.2 13.8 11.2

27 Lesotho 13.2 14.6 14.6 14.9 12.9

28 Mauritania 22.7 16.2 17.2 14.6 13.2

28 Philippines 19.9 17.4 17.7 14.0 13.2

30 Benin 22.5 20.5 17.3 15.2 13.3

Source: International Food Policy

Research Institute (IFPRI, 2013)

Food security

Mankind is passing from the primacy of the past to the

primacy of expectations of vast future changes.

Harold D. Lasswell

SUSTAINABILITY

of POVERTY?

Public Investment Behavior in Agriculture

0

2.000

4.000

6.000

8.000

10.000

12.000

14.000

16.000

18.000

20.000

2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009

Bu

dg

et i

n B

illi

on

Ru

pia

n

agricultureFertilizer Subsidy

ONLY 1.1 % FOR R&D (2009)

Rice Subsidy

For the poor

irrigation

Where major public investment go?

Biotechnology ??

ALLOCATION OF AGRICULTURE PUBLIC BUDGET:

2001 AND 2009 (Billion Rupiah)

BUDGET COMPONENT 2001 2009 Change (%)

1. National Budget for Agriculture 3.620 36.749 915.16

1.0 Agric. Budget Excluding Subsidy 3.620 16.820 364.64

1.1 National Government 1.032 6.559 535.56

1.2 Regional/Local Government 2.393 9.575 300.12

1.3 Fertilizer Subsidy 0

18.532

(30.23%) -

1.4 Seed Subsidy 0 1.397 -

1.5 Research and Development

195

(1.6%)

686

(1.1%) 251.79

2. Irrigation

4.784

(40.12%)

10.191

(16.6%) 113.02

2.1 National Government 3.971 6.478 63.13

2.2 Regional/Local Government 813 3.713 356.7

3. Rice Subsidy for The Poor Household

3.518

(29.5%)

14.360

(23.4%) 308.18

Total Agriculture Sector Budget 11.922 61.300 414.17

Total Agric Budget Relative to Total Government

Budget (%) 3 5 2

Source: YAPARI, 2014

MAIN LESSONS FROM OUR PAST

• GREEN REVOLUTION TECHNOLOGY AND ITS COMPLEMENTARY

INPUTS HAD BEEN ADOPTED VERY FAST

• 15 YEARS OF ITS APPLICATION GAVE INDONESIA RICE SELF

SUFFICIENCY STATUS

• BUT THE LAW OF DIMINISHING RETURN FROM OLD AGRIC.

TECHNOLOGY ARRIVED VERY SOON

• ENVIRONMENTAL THREATS AND INCREASING NATURAL RESOURCES

SCARCITIES ESPECIALLY WATER

• EMERGING OF BIOTECHNOLOGY AS ONE OF HUMAN INGENUITY

II. WHAT ARE INDONESIA BASIC PROBLEMS NOW and POTENTIALS IN THE FUTURE, LET’S SAY 2045 & WHAT ARE THE ROLES OF BIOTECH?

• POPULATION? CLOSER TO 400 M; NOW IS 250 M

– FOOD, FEED, FIBER, VITAMIN, MINERALS, ETC.

– ROOM, SHELTHER, PROTECTION, ETC

– ROADS, BUILDING, FACTORIES, ETC.

• GIVEN:

– LIMITED LAND AND FRESH WATER RESOURCES

– ARCHIPELAGIC SPATIAL PATTERN

– LOW CAPACITY IN R&D AND HR

– AGRICULTURAL INVOLUTION INSTITUTION

ARCHIPELAGO OF INDONESIA, COMPOSED OF MORE THAN 17000

ISLANDS: NATURE OF MARINE AND ISLANDS BIOGEOGRAPHY

Cultural Diversity and Biological Diversity

http://www.fao.org/docrep/w1033e/w1033e09.htm

SETTING NEW GOALS AND NEW

WAYS TO REACH THE GOALS

• WHAT ARE OUR APPROPRIATE GOALS FOR

OUR FUTURE?

– RICE SELF-SUFFICIENCY OR WHAT?

– BETTER NUTRITIONAL BALANCE?

– FARMERS’ INCOME?

– ENVIRONMENT?

– FOOD SECURITY?

• WHAT, WHERE, WHO AND HOW:

BIOTECHNOLOGY WILL BE USED?

MY VIEW ON FUTURE OF

INDONESIA’S AGRICULTURE• BIOTECHNOLOGY CAN SIGNIFICANTLY CONTRIBUTE TO

INDONESIA’S BETTER FUTURE

• IF IT IS DESIGNATED FROM ITS BEGINNING TO BE SUITABLE WITH LOCAL POTENTIALS

• DIRECTLY INTEGRATED WITH GREEN PROCESS OF INDUSTRIALIZATION BASED UPON THE NATURE OF MARINE AND ISLAND BIOGEOGRAPHY CHARACTERISTICS OF EACH ISLAND WITHIN THE CONTEXT OF AN ARCHIPELAGO NATIONBODIVERSITY FOCUS

• CAPITALIZING THE ROLES OF BIOTECHNOLOGY GIVEN BIODIVERSITIES ENDOWED BY INDONESIA

• FARMERS’ FIRST APPROACH: FARMERS OWNED BASED COMPANY

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

Ag

ric.

Sh

are

of

GD

P a

nd

e

mp

loym

en

t (%

)

% Agric GDP

% Agric. Employment

INDONESIA RATE OF INDUSTRIALIZATION: SLOW!

BOUNDED BY INDUSTRIALIZATION

Source: WDI, WB, 2013

0,0

10,0

20,0

30,0

40,0

50,0

60,0

70,0

Malaysia agric. labor (%)

Indonesia Agric. Labor (%)

% OF AGRIC. LABOR DIFFERENT RATE OF INDUSTRIALIZATION

0

5.000.000

10.000.000

15.000.000

20.000.000

25.000.000

30.000.000

35.000.000

40.000.000

45.000.000

1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011

NUMBER OF FARMERS

INDONESIA

Java

SUMATERA

CELEBES

KALIMANTAN

Java is only 6.9 % out of Indonesia’s

land and Java carries more than a

half of Indonesian population. LAND AGRICULTURAL PARADOX.

GLOBAL CLIMATE CHANGE IS REAL

ENTERING A NEW WORLD:

FROM GREEN REVOLUTION

TO

GREENER GENE REVOLUTION

BIOTECHNOLOGY:

IMPACT OF UNSUCCESSFULL AND

SUCCESFULL INDUSTRIALIZATION

AGRICULTURAL INVOLUTION IN

INDONESIA, INCREASING

PRODUCTIVITY BLOCKING

FARMERS’ WELFARE

AGRICULTURAL SIZE EXPANSIONAND APPLICATION OF BIOTECH.

INDONESIA USA

THE BEGINNING OF BIOTECH

WORLD’S HISTORY:

THE ORIGIN OF CARTAGENA

PROTOCOL

AND

THE EMERGENCE OF SOCIO-

ECONOMIC CONSIDERATION IN IT

ENVIRONMENTALISM AND DEVELOPMENTALISM

MET IN THE AGENDA 21 (1992)

Section I. Social and economic dimensions

Ch. 2. Sustainable development in developing countries Ch. 3. Combating poverty Ch. 4. Changing consumption patterns Ch. 5. Demographic dynamics and sustainability Ch. 6. Human health conditions Ch. 7. Sustainable human settlement development Ch. 8. Integrating environment and development

Agenda 21 (1992): THE INCLUSION OF

BIOTECHNOLOGY

Section II. Conservation and management of resources.

Ch. 9. Protection of the atmosphere Ch. 10. Management of land resources Ch. 11. Combating deforestation Ch. 12. Combating desertification and drought Ch. 13. Sustainable mountain development Ch. 14. Sustainable agriculture and rural development Ch. 15. Conservation of biological diversityCh. 16. Environmentally sound management of biotechnology

Ch. 16: Env. Sound Management of Biotechnology

Preamble: Modern biotechnology is a set of techniques for bringing about specific changes in DNA in organisms.

By itself, biotechnology cannot resolve all the fundamental problems of environment and development, but it promises to make a significant contribution in enabling the development of, for example, better health care, enhanced food security through sustainable agricultural practices,improved supplies of potable water, more efficient industrial development processes for transforming raw materials, support for sustainable methods of afforestation and reforestation, and detoxification of hazardous wastes.

Ch. 16: Env. sound management of biotechnology

Objective: Promote the development of sustainable applications of biotechnology and to establish appropriate enabling mechanisms, especially within developing countries, through three program areas:

a. Increasing the availability of food, feed and renewableb. Improving human health;c. Enhancing protection of the environmentd. Developing international mechanisms for cooperation

Estimated total annual cost (1993-2000): 5 billion USD.

CARTAGENA PROTOCOL ADOPTED IN MONTREAL

2000: THE NEW BIRTH OF REVOLUTION IN

AGRICULTURE WORLD WIDE

LESSON FROM GLOBAL EXPERIENCE:

COMMERCIALIZATION OF GMOs

•Commercialization of GMOs started in

1996

•The world planted GMOs in 1996 by

only 1.7 million ha

• INDONESIA ADOPT Bt-Cotton IN

2001-2003, but it was

discontinued

• Now is about 175 million hectares

SOCIO-ECONOMIC CONSIDERATION WITHIN THE

CONTECT OF CARTAGENA PROTOCOL

Agenda 21: Section I. Social and economic dimensions

Article 26 Socio-economic Consideration

In Cartagena Protocol Social and Economic

Dimension in Agenda 21 Section I has been

reduced to BIOSAFETY ISSUE:

I. ENVIRONMENTAL SAFETY

II. FOOD SAFETY

III. FEED SAFETY

Ch. 2. Sustainable development in

developing countries

Ch. 3. Combating poverty

Ch. 4. Changing consumption

patterns

Ch. 5. Demographic dynamics and

sustainability

Ch. 6. Human health conditions

Ch. 7. Sustainable human

settlement development

Ch. 8. Integrating environment and

development

Article

26

SOCIO-ECONOMIC CONSIDERATIONS

1. The Parties, in reaching a decision on import under this Protocol or under

its domestic measures implementing the Protocol, may take into account,

consistent with their international obligations, socio-economic considerations

arising from the impact of living modified organisms on the conservation and

sustainable use of biological diversity, especially with regard to the value of

biological diversity to indigenous and local communities.

2. The Parties are encouraged to cooperate on research and information

exchange on any socio-economic impacts of living modified organisms,

especially on indigenous and local communities.

TEST OF CLARITY OR LACK OF AMBIGUITY OF MEANINGS

OF CERTAIN TERMS OR THEIR RELATIONS

Agenda 21 (1992)

SOCIAL and ECONOMIC

ASPECTS WITHIN THE

CONTEXT OF

SUSTAINABLE

DEVELOPMENT (VERY

BROAD)

Cartagena Protocol adopted in Montreal on 29 January 2000

• Biosafety Context:

A concept refers to the need to protect human health and the environment from the possible adverse effects of the products of modern biotechnology

Socio-economic aspects as a part of consideration in biosafety approval

CARTAGENA PROTOCOL: THE CLARITY OF SOCIO-

ECONOMIC CONSIDERATION UNDERSTANDING

Article

3

USE OF TERMS

For the purposes of this Protocol:

(a) “Conference of the Parties” means the Conference of the Parties to the

Convention;

(b) “Contained use” means any operation, undertaken within a facility, installation

or other physical structure, which involves living modified organisms that are

controlled by specific measures that effectively limit their contact with, and their

impact on, the external environment;

(c) “Export” means intentional transboundary movement from one Party to

another Party;

(e) “Import” means intentional transboundary movement into one Party from

another Party;

(f) “Importer” means any legal or natural person, under the jurisdiction of the

Party of import, who arranges for a living modified organism to be imported;

(g) “Living modified organism” means any living organism that possesses

a novel combination of genetic material obtained through the use of modern

biotechnology;

(h) “Living organism” means any biological entity capable of transferring

or replicating genetic material, including sterile organisms, viruses

and viroids;

(i) “Modern biotechnology” means the application of:

a. In vitro nucleic acid techniques, including recombinant deoxyribonucleic

acid (DNA) and direct injection of nucleic acid into cells or organelles, or

b. Fusion of cells beyond the taxonomic family, that overcome natural

physiological reproductive or recombination barriers and that are not

techniques used in traditional breeding and selection;

(j) “Regional economic integration organization” means an organization

constituted by sovereign States of a given region, to which its member

States have transferred competence in respect of matters governed by this

Protocol and which has been duly authorized, in accordance with its

internal procedures, to sign, ratify, accept, approve or accede to it;

(k) “Transboundary movement” means the movement of a living modified

organism from one Party to another Party, save that for the purposes of

Articles

17 and 24 transboundary movement extends to movement between Parties

and non-Parties.

We may conclude:

•There is no defined socio-economic

term provided by Cartagena

Protocol

•So, it does not clear by its given

regulation.

•It will depend on whose interest counts

in making interpretation and

decision

Then: What do we mean by Socio-

economic Consideration?

• Meaning of socio-economic depends on

ones philosophical methodological

orientation regarding values (Johnson,

1986):

– Positivism and its variation such as

conditional normativism

– Normatism

– Pragmatism

POLICY PRODUCE SOLUTION TO THE REAL WORLD PROBLEM , CALLS FOR

PRAGMATISM

CONTRIBUTION OF SOCIO-ECONOMIC DISCIPLINES TO

PRODUCE POSITIVE AND PARTICULARLY NORMATIVE

KNOWLEDGECharacteristics of a thing, a

situation or a condition in social

context

Norms, laws, rules, and other

things similar

Rightness Wrongness

Goodness Monetary Value The area of decision

making that should be

avoided. It is because

wrong by according to

norms, laws, etc.

Non-Monetary

Values

Badness Monetary Value

Non-Monetary

Value

Net Value X? The cost of avoiding

wrong desicion/the cost

of adopting wrong

decisions.

Decision Making In Biosafety of GMOs

Rationality Bounded Rationality

(Herbert Simon)

Theoretical Perfect Information,

Optimization

Satisfying Criteria,

Heuristic, Non-

optimization

Practical Constrained by perfect

information/knowledge

assumtion

Having perfect

knoweldge infinitely

costly

PRESCRIPTIVE KNOWLEDGE

AND ITS OBJECTIVITY TEST What? Descriptive Knowledge of Values or Value Free Positivistic Knwledge

What ought to be done: Prescriptive Knowledge= Recommendation

• Value Free Positivistic

Knowledge:

– Social Behavior Toward New

Technology

– Rate Of Adoption Of

Biotechnology

– Impact Of Adoption Of New

Biotechn0logy On Pesticide

Use

• Knowledge about Values:– Monetary value:

• Cost of production

• Profit, rent, etc.

– Non-monetary values:

• PRESCRIPTIVE

KNOWLEDGE:

– WHAT IS RIGHT THING

TO DO TO ACHIEVE

CERTAIN POLICY

OBJECTIVES BY USING

NEW TEHNOLOGY

• TEST OF OBJECTIVITY:

– W O R K A B I L I T Y: D O

W E R E A C H T H E

G O A L S ?

HARMONIZING SUBSTANTIAL EQUIVALENCE

AND PRECAUTIONARY PRINCIPLE

Substantial Equivalence Precautionary Principles

• Right according to the

Results

• Right according to

regulatory procedures

BOTH ARE IMPORTANT:

NEED HARMONIZATION

CALLS FOR:

TRANSDISCIPLINARY SCIENCE BASED POLICY

RECOMMENDATION

APPLICATION: Trying to use the

above frame of thinking

Biotechnology as Endogenous Variable Socio-

economic as one of Exogenous Variables

Activities In Biotechnology

Explanatory/Exogenous Variables:

• Investment in R&D

• R&D policies

• HRD in R&D and Education

• National Research Systems

• Politico, Legal and Socio-cultural variables

Outputs/IMPACTS

DEVELOPMENT OR

UNDER-DEVELOPMENT

OF BIOTECHNOLOGY

EITHER IN

LABORATORY OR IN

THE FIELDS OF

APLICATIONS

Cause

GREEN REVOLUTION

• Global & national convergence

• National government had played as

PROMOTER OF GREEN

REVOLUTION Tech.

• Significant change in almost all

aspects of agriculture and its

associated variables: industry,

consumption, trades, laws, land use,

infrastructure

• Critics on negative impacts on

environments such as water pollution

• Socio-economic impact: farmers

getting poorer and inequality issue.

GREENER GENE REVOLUTION

• Induced MOSTLY by private companies innitiatives supported by government policies AND REGULATIONS

• Adoption rate has been very fast. Increase from 1.7 M ha to 175M ha in 18 years increase by 1375 %/year or 25000% increase in 18 years

• Understanding of Socio-economic consideration in the context of Precautionary Principle

• Public investment for public goods

Biotechnology as One of Exogenous Variable, what are

the impacts?

Here We See Biotech As Major Changing Variable

Special Case of GMOs Impacts: HOW TO INTERNALIZED

CONSERVATION AND BIOLOGICAL DIVERSITIES AND

INDEGENOUS AND LOCAL COMMUNITIES

Conservation and

sustainable use of biological diversity

• What socio-economic consideration?

– Initial socio-economic condition of rural and agric societies and their interests

– Knowledge, concern and adaptability of communities to GMOs technology

– Expected positive impact and prohibited/avoidance of negative impacts

Value of biological diversity to

indigenous and local

communities.

• Lesson learned through co-evolutionary process

• Protection of indigenous and local communities

• Because spatial distribution of biological diversities do not follow administrative boundary then the benefits of R&D for same species can be shared

INDONESIA LAWS AND REGULATIONS IN

TRANSGENIC PRODUCTS

• Ministry of Agriculture Desicion No. 856/Kpts/HK.330/9/1997: Biosafety for Genetically Modified Products of Agricultural Products

• Joint Decree of Ministry of Agriculture, Ministry of Health, Ministry of Forestry and Plantation and State Ministry of Food and Horticulture Nomor 998.1/Kpts/OT.210/9/99: Biosafety and Food Safety of Genetically Modofied Organism.

• Law No. 21, 2004: Ratification of Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety to the Convention on Biological Diversity

• Government Regulation No. 21, 2005: Biosafety of Genetically Mofied Organism

• President Regulation No. 39, 2010: Biosafety Commission for GMOs

• President Regulation 2014

Biosafety Committee

Biosafety Technical Team

Biosafety Clearing House

ProponentMinister of Agriculture

Minister of Environment

BC

BTT

BCH

1

PUBLIC

14 d

Minister of Agriculture

2

3

414 d

14 d

9

1014 d

60 d

11

7 d

BCT CFT

56 d

14 d

15 d

7 d

5

6

7

8

Minister of Environment

52

Status of Environment Safety of Biotech

Crops in Indonesia in 1999

Crops Trait Event Status *

Maize Herbicide Tolerant

glyphosate

GA 21 Environment

Safety

Maize Insect Resistance MON 810 Environment

Safety

Cotton Herbicide Tolerant

glyphosate

MON1445/1698 Environment

Safety

Cotton Insect Resistance MON531/757/1076 Environment

Safety

Soybean Herbicide Tolerant

glyphosate

GTS 40-3-2 Environment

Safety

*) Recomendation from Biosafety Committee


Sugarcane Drought Tolerance NXI-1T, NXI-4T,

and NXI-6T

Environment

Safety

Status of Environment Safety of Biotech Crops in Indonesia in

2011

Status of Food Safety of Biotech

Crops in Indonesia in 2011



glyphosate

NK603 Food Safety

Maize Insect Resistance MON 89034 Food Safety


glyphosate

GTS 40-3-2 Food Safety


glyphosate

MON89788 Food Safety


Maize Insect Resistance MIR162 Food Safety

Maize Insect Resistance BT11 Food Safety

Maize Insect Resistance MIR604 Food Safety


glyphosate

GA21 Food Safety

Continued:


Sugarcane Drought Tolerance NXI-1T, NXI-4T,

and NXI-6T

Food Safety (2012)

Maize Amylase

Modification

3272 Food Safety (2012)

Soybean Insect Resistance MON87701 Food Safety (2013)

Soybean Increasing

unsaturated fatty

acid profile

MON87705 Food Safety (2013)

Status of Food Safety of Biotech Crops in

Indonesia in 2012 and 2013

MAJOR CONSTRAINTS: R&D Capacity of Agency for Agricultural Research and Development (AARD)

• Human Resource Capacity:

1994 -2002: • Mollecular Biologists: 11 persons • Reproduction and growth researchers: 9 persons• Graduate Program in The Netherland, Australia, USA and Japan: 11 persons

2003 – present – Mollecular bilogy research group: 34 persons – Cells and organ reserach group: 13 persons(Source: AARD, 2013)

Closing Remarks• ADOPTION OF BIOTECHNOLOGY HAS BEEN DETERMINED BY CO-

EVOLUTIONARY PROCESS BETWEEN GOVERNMENTS, BUSINESS ENTITIES, FARMERS, R&D INSTITUTIONS, UNIVERSITIES, NGOs, AND OTHER INTERESTED PARTIES

• Socio-economic consideration should be understood within the broader context of undertanding of inter-relationships between biotechnology and its environments (one is socio-economic).

• THERE ARE REVOLUTIONS IN AGRICULTURE ACROSS OUR HISTORY: – from hunting and gathering to slash and burning (shifting) agriculture

– from shifting agriculture to traditional agriculture

– from traditional agriculture to industrialized agriculture

– from industrialized agriculture to scientific based agriculture• Biotechnology revolution: From Green to Greener Revolution

• Revolutionary agriculture: Should be used as inducement for fasteting rural and urban industrialization

• Need new Norms, Laws, Policy and Regulatory for better future for all people in this one only PLANET for all of us. Need strong global cooperation.

Biotechnology and Indonesian’s Food Sovereignty

Food

Transcript of Biotechnology and Indonesian’s Food Sovereignty