Commercial organic farming is the greatest threat to biodiversity, and not genetically modified crops as is repeatedly claimed by anti-GM food activists, said Prof Peter Whittaker, professor of biology at NUI Maynooth.
That threat was because organic farming had significantly lower productivity levels, with one study indicating a figure as low as 50 per cent compared to conventional farming. "GM agriculture is already shown to be more productive than conventional agriculture, thus providing the potential for restoration of wildlife habitats," he said.
He said the ethical principle of "do no harm" would consequently demand that the least possible area of land be used for agriculture. Farming needed to be as efficient as possible, and GM production could respond to that requirement.
Ms Kathryn Marsh of the Organic Trust, however, disputed his claim relating to organic farming productivity. Long-term studies had shown yield benefits from that sector, notably in dairying.
Prof Whittaker said that where problems surrounding GM foods had been reported, they had not been the result of genetic modification itself. Case by case assessment of health and environmental risks is carried out by regulatory bodies, "strong enough to resist pressure from industries who want quick and positive decisions, and experienced enough to distinguish any real risks from the myriad of hypothetical ones put forward by anti-GM activists".
Prof Whittaker said Ireland should take the lead in Europe in the development, regulation and approval of GM crops. This should include rigorous testing, close monitoring of crops over five years and extensive labelling in response to consumer wishes.
