Opinion
European Union policies are detrimental to Africa
Publish Date: Mar 25, 2014
newvision
  • mail
  • img

By Clet Wandui Masiga

ADOPTION of most European Union (EU) policies by African governments is so detrimental to Africa with serious repercussions on Africa's socio-economic development. 

What is even worrying is Africans end up clinging on old ideas from Europe which even Europeans have abandoned. Although some Africans could have resisted adopting genetically modified organisms (GMOs), the current debate on GMOs is a good example. 

In diffusing and promoting adoption of new ideas, technologies, innovations and practices, there are several challenges which are influenced by the demographic and psychological characteristics of defined adopter groups. 

A technology/innovation adoption lifecycle curve model indicates that the first group of people to use a new product is are innovators, followed by early adopters, then early and late majority, and the last group to adopt a product are the laggards. 

These laggards exist in all countries but European resistance to GMOs in the last 25 years was not in a true sense of laggards. 

The rejection of GMOs by Europeans was because they had so much cheap food from around the world and they did not need the help of science to make more. 

Their farming was already too advanced making use of science and technology to work the farm and their citizens had the luxury of deciding what kinds of foods to eat. 

The war of the giants, Europeans and Americans started. Europe looked for supporters to influence the global decisions in GMOs and as usual Africa has the numbers. 

The Harvard Director of the Science, Technology, and Globalisation, Prof. Calestous Juma have told European politicians that it is at the behest of Europe that many countries in Africa have laws and rules that limit the testing and cultivation of GM plants even though there is now overwhelming evidence that the technology can boost food production with comparatively little or no adverse environmental impact. 

He has urged that Europe forcibly recruited African governments as allies in its trade war with North America, arguing that importing GM products could cause catastrophic damage to the environment. 

It involved putting diplomatic pressure on African countries saying that if you produce GM crops we will not import any agricultural products from your countries. Europe didn’t want to see GM material entering from Africa when it was saying ‘No’ to North American GM products, so Europe then pressured African countries not to grow GM crops which has a great detriment to African farming. 

Through a number of funding agencies, Europeans and their allied groups in the US recruited African activists and paid them huge allowances to reject GMOs. 

To date funding to ant-GMO activities are up to $2.5b annually. These NGOs have taken advantage of the laggards in Africa to promote European policies of pushing their prejudices on Africa, which still relies on foreign aid to feed its people. 

Europeans are using NGOs and diplomatic channels to push organic agriculture and a European-style regulatory system in Africa. 

They are promoting European policies that deny Africa well-intentioned and appropriate GM technology. 

These policies will continue to lead to food shortages and agricultural disasters in Africa. 

Right now Africa and Uganda in particular is at its full throttle to ban the use of GMOs in agriculture but Europeans themselves are turning around. 

European scientists lead by the UK has demanded European politicians to put in place policies to allow use of GMOs to increase agricultural production and make farming competitive. 

They have asked for right regulatory framework to encourage continued research and deployment of solutions to problems facing the UK agriculture. 

Europe's turnaround is in recognition that most people do not understand the challenges of food production and distribution. 

All they see are supermarkets with shelves loaded with foods from every part of the globe.

Writer is a conservation biologist, geneticist and farm entrepreneur 

The statements, comments, or opinions expressed through the use of New Vision Online are those of their respective authors, who are solely responsible for them, and do not necessarily represent the views held by the staff and management of New Vision Online.

New Vision Online reserves the right to moderate, publish or delete a post without warning or consultation with the author.Find out why we moderate comments. For any questions please contact digital@newvision.co.ug

  • mail
  • img
blog comments powered by Disqus
Also In This Section
Opposition’s altercations won’t dampen Museveni’s favourable polls
The USAID funded survey on public opinion of Ugandans and whose results were released by the International Republican Institute (IRI), should be an eye opener to our venerated opposition....
China and global governance
It is safe to say that the most consequential geostrategic development of the last two decades has been China’s rise....
Kalangala story on oil palm inaccurate
I am writing in reference to the article which appeared on page 10 of the New Vision of March 30, 2015 titled “Kalangala farmers abandon Oil Palm”....
Opposition’s altercations won’t dampen Museveni’s favourable polls
The USAID-funded survey on public opinion of Ugandans and whose results were released by the IRI should be an eye opener to our venerated opposition....
Data from national ID register can make voters’ role much better
Some days back, the Registration of Persons Bill, 2014 was passed by Parliament and subsequently assented to by the President....
Teenage pregnancy still a big challenge
Sexual education and life skills training are key to addressing the current sexual and reproductive health challenges for young people in Uganda...
Should police arrest parents who do not take their children to school?
Yes
No
Can't Say
follow us
subscribe to our news letter