Posted 5:20 PM by Tevita
EXTENSIVE PATENT ON PIGS ISSUED - GREENPEACE WILL LAY OBJECTION

From : Genet News

EXTENSIVE PATENT ON PIGS ISSUED - GREENPEACE WILL LAY OBJECTION

Greenpeace will lay objection

Munich/Hamburg, 16 July. - The European Patent Office in Munich is today
granting an extensive patent (EP 1651777) on a method of breeding pigs
despite international criticism and lack of clarity on the patent's
legality. According to Greenpeace's analyses the genetic conditions
described in it occur in all European pig breeds. The claims have been
formulated in such a way that not only do they include the breeding method;
the patent owner can in a dispute also make claims on pigs themselves and
all their progeny.

Greenpeace will lay an objection to the patent because it is in violation of
the ban on patenting "mainly biological processes" for breeding. The
European Patent Office is at present examining the extent to which patents
on the breeding of normal plants and animals may in principle be granted at
all. A decision on this is expected in 2009.

"Corporations can use patents like this to go a long way towards
monopolising animal breeding in Europe," says the patents expert Christoph
Then on Greenpeace's behalf. "It is incredible that the European Patent
Office is issuing a patent which is based on normal breeding and does not
include any inventive steps whatsoever. This takeover of food production
through patents must be halted."

The US corporation Monsanto had originally applied for the patent in 2005.
Making it known that it was collaborating closely with Monsanto, the US
corporation Lengsham Choice Genetics bought the patent while the application
was being examined.

In Greenpeace's view the patent infringes patent law rules in part because
it is neither inventive nor is there an adequate description of how the
breeding method can be used.

Greenpeace is opposed to patents on seeds and beneficial animals as part of
an international coalition (No patents on seeds) in which over 50
agricultural organisations have joined together.

Posted 5:15 PM by Tevita
Another Inconvenient Truth

How biofuel policies are deepening poverty and accelerating climate change

From : Oxfam

Biofuels are presented in rich countries as a solution to two crises: the climate crisis and the oil crisis. But they may not be a solution to either, and instead are contributing to a third: the current food crisis.
Meanwhile the danger is that they allow rich-country governments to avoid difficult but urgent decisions about how to reduce consumption of oil, while offering new avenues to continue expensive support to agriculture at the cost of taxpayers.
In the meantime, the most serious costs of these policies – deepening poverty and hunger, environmental degradation, and accelerating climate change – are being ‘dumped’ on developing countries.
Neither a solution to the climate crisis…
Rich countries’ biofuel policies currently offer neither a safe nor an effective means to tackle climate change. By increasing aggregate demand for agricultural land, they will drive the expansion of farming into critical carbon sinks such as forests, wetlands, and grasslands, triggering the release of carbon from soils and vegetation that will take decades and in some cases centuries of biofuel production to repay, at a time when emissions need to peak and fall within the next 10 to 15 years:
• Analysis published in the journal Science calculates that the emissions from global land-use change due to the US corn-ethanol programme will take 167 years to pay back.
• European Union (EU) biodiesel consumption is driving spiralling demand for palm oil both for use in biodiesel, but also to replace rapeseed and other edible oils diverted into the European biofuel programme. Oxfam estimates that by 2020, the emissions resulting from land-use change in the palm-oil sector may have reached between 3.1 and 4.6 billion tonnes of CO2 – 46 to 68 times the annual saving the EU hopes to be achieving by then from biofuels.
Even ignoring land-use change, biofuels are an overly expensive way of achieving emissions reductions from transport. Improving car efficiency is far more cost effective: while the costs of avoiding a tonne of CO2 through biofuels run into the hundreds of dollars, ambitious improvements in vehicle efficiency can yield profits, as reduced fuel costs exceed technology costs. Biomass can be used far more efficiently in static applications such as commercial boilers or combined heat and power.
…nor a solution to the oil crisis
Rich countries’ biofuel policies currently offer neither a safe nor an effective means to address fuel security. Consumption of oil in rich countries is so huge that for biofuels to be a significant alternative requires massive amounts of agricultural production. If the entire corn harvest of the USA was diverted to ethanol, it would only be able to replace about one gallon in every six sold in the USA. If the entire world supply of carbohydrates (starch and sugar crops) was converted to ethanol, this would only be able to replace at
2 Another Inconvenient Truth, Oxfam Briefing Paper, June 2008
most 40 per cent of global petrol consumption. Global oilseed production would be unable even to reach a 10 per cent share of diesel consumption.
Moreover, the costs of using biofuels to improve fuel security are prohibitively expensive. The European Commission’s own research body has estimated that the EU’s proposed 10 per cent biofuel target will cost about $90bn from now until 2020, and will offer enhanced fuel security worth only $12bn. Policies to reduce demand for transport fuels, such as regulation to improve vehicle efficiency, are far safer and more cost effective.
Meanwhile 30 million people are dragged into poverty
Biofuel mandates and support measures in rich countries are driving up food prices as they divert more and more food crops and agricultural land into fuel production. Meanwhile sugarcane ethanol from Brazil, production of which has a far less significant impact on global food prices, is excluded through the use of tariffs.
The World Bank estimates that the price of food has increased by 83 per cent in the last three years. For the world’s poor people, who may spend 50–80 per cent of their income on food, this is disastrous. Oxfam estimates that the livelihoods of at least 290 million people are immediately threatened by the food crisis, and the Bank estimates that 100 million people have already fallen into poverty as a result. Thirty per cent of price increases are attributable to biofuels, suggesting biofuels have endangered the livelihoods of nearly 100 million people and dragged over 30 million into poverty.
The International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI) notes that by forcing up food prices, rich-country support for biofuels acts as a tax on food – a regressive tax felt most by poor people for whom food purchases represent a greater share of income. Last year, it is estimated that industrialised countries spent $13–15bn ‘taxing’ food, equal to the amount of funding required to assist those immediately threatened by the food crisis. These amounts will continue to spiral as rich countries increase their consumption of biofuels.
Herein lies the true attraction of ethanol and biodiesel for rich-country governments – an avenue for continued support to agriculture.
Oxfam calls on rich countries urgently to dismantle support and incentives for biofuels in order to avoid further deepening poverty and accelerating climate change.
Specifically, rich countries should:
• introduce a freeze on the implementation of further biofuel mandates, and carry out an urgent revision of existing targets that deepen poverty and accelerate climate change;
• dismantle subsidies and tax exemptions for biofuels and reduce import tariffs;
• tackle climate change and fuel security through safe and cost-effective measures, prioritising regulation to enforce ambitious vehicle-efficiency improvements.
Another Inconvenient Truth, Oxfam Briefing Paper, June 2008 3
An opportunity for developing countries?
For poor countries that tend to have comparative advantages in the production of feedstocks, biofuels may offer some genuine development opportunities, but the potential economic, social, and environmental costs are severe.
Oxfam recommends that developing countries move with caution and give priority to poor people in rural areas when developing their bioenergy strategies.
Specifically, developing countries should:
• prioritise bioenergy projects that provide clean renewable energy sources to poor men and women in rural areas – these are unlikely to be ethanol or biodiesel projects;
• consider the costs as well as the benefits involved in biofuel strategies: the financial costs of support, the opportunity costs of alternative agriculture and poverty reduction strategies, and social and environmental costs.
If they decide to proceed with biofuel strategies, developing-country governments should:
• carry out their obligations under international law and conventions, including obligations to protect the right to food, to ensure decent work, and to ensure that the Free, Prior and Informed Consent of affected communities is obtained before biofuel projects commence;
• give priority to feedstocks and production models which maximise opportunities for men and women small farmers.
And companies and investors operating in developing countries should:
• ensure no biofuel project takes place without the Free, Prior and Informed Consent of local communities, and that men and women workers at all stages of production in their value chains enjoy decent work;
• treat men and women smallholder farmers fairly and transparently;
• provide smallholders in their value chains sufficient freedom of choice in their farming decisions to ensure food security for them and their families.
4 Another Inconvenient Truth, Oxfam Briefing Paper, June 2008

© Oxfam International June 2008
This paper was written by Robert Bailey. Oxfam acknowledges the assistance of Sonja Vermeulen, Sophia Murphy, John Wilkinson, and Selena Herrera in its production. It is part of a series of papers written to inform public debate on development and humanitarian policy issues.
The text may be used free of charge for the purposes of advocacy, campaigning, education, and research, provided that the source is acknowledged in full. The copyright holder requests that all such use be registered with them for impact assessment purposes. For copying in any other circumstances, or for re-use in other publications, or for translation or adaptation, permission must be secured and a fee may be charged. E-mail publish@oxfam.org.uk.
For further information on the issues raised in this paper please e-mail advocacy@oxfaminternational.org.
The information in this publication is correct at the time of going to press.

Posted 3:06 PM by Tevita
Northern Lau biodiversity survey results 2007 released

From : USP

Around 30 Turaga-ni-koro (village spokesperson) from the Lau Province attended a seminar organized by the Institute of Applied Science, to listen to results of biodiversity surveys and community engagement efforts that was undertaken in Northern Lau, in September 2007.

The Turaga-ni-koros who are currently in Suva for the Lau Provincial Council meeting attended the seminar that was held at the Marine studies lecture theatre recently.

The Northern Lau survey in September 2007 had a holistic approach to addressing biodiversity related issues, by looking at three key components; terrestrial biodiversity, marine biodiversity and socio-economic aspects of marine resource use by local communities in the area. To fully achieve this mammoth task over a three week period required team effort by researchers from the Institute of Applied Science, Department of Fisheries, Department of Forestry and Nature Fiji (Mareqeti Viti), totaling ten Fiji researchers, and two from Georgia Tech university, who were undertaking research on algae.

Surveys looked into the following areas:
1) Terrestrial biodiversity surveys
a. Mammals & herpetofauna
b. Vegetation & flora
c. Avifauna & invertebrates
2) Marine biodiversity surveys (corals, fish & invertebrates)
a. Rapid assessment in 14 fishing grounds by IAS
b. Rapid assessment by Fisheries Department around Vanua balavu
3) Marine sponge and alga research

The outcomes of the terrestrial and marine surveys highlights the biodiversity and endemism of the northern Lau group as well as the threats faced by the region from invasive species, detrimental anthropogenic activities including agriculture and cattle grazing, overfishing, and the use of inappropriate marine harvesting techniques.

Four islands or island groups in the Northern Lau group are currently preliminarily listed as Sites of National Significance: Wailagilala, Kibobo Islets, Sovu Islets and Nukucikobia. Based on the results of this survey, an additional five islands or island groups are to be added to this list: Tuvuca (based on plants and vegetation, marine invertebrates), Namalala (plants, vegetation and aesthetic value), Susui (plants, vegetation and turtles), Qilaqila Bay of Islands (plants, vegetation and aesthetic value), and Nukutolu Islets (birds, marine invertebrates).

The Institute of Applied Sciences thanked organizations for providing the personnel for various trips and assisting with the preliminary assessment of data collected:

Organisations involved includes The South Pacific Regional Herbarium, NatureFiji-Mareqeti Viti, Fiji Department of Forestry, Fiji Department of Fisheries, the Environment Unit and the Natural Products Unit of the Institute of Applied Sciences, and the National Trust of Fiji.

The core funding for the survey was provided by the Institute of Applied Sciences through their Natural Products Research Program. Additional funds were provided by a generous donation from Conservation International (Fiji Program). TOTAL (Fiji) limited supplied all fuels and lubricants required for the trip at a special concession price and the Department of Fisheries provided at no cost the use of their research vessel the “Tuiniwasabula” and its crew.

Posted 7:03 PM by Tevita
Fortified Cassava Could Provide A Day's Nutrition In A Single Meal

From : Science Daily

ScienceDaily, June 30, 2008



Scientists have determined how to fortify the cassava plant, a staple root crop in many developing countries, with enough vitamins, minerals and protein to provide the poor and malnourished with a day's worth of nutrition in a single meal.

The researchers have further engineered the cassava plant so it can resist the crop's most damaging viral threats and are refining methods to reduce cyanogens, substances that yield poisonous cyanide if they are not properly removed from the food before consumption. The reduction of cyanogens also can shorten the time it takes to process the plant into food, which typically requires three to six
days to complete.
Studies also are under way to extend the plant's shelf life so it can be stored or shipped.

The international team of scientists hopes to translate the greenhouse research into a product that can be field tested in at least two African nations by 2010. Funded by more than $12.1 million in grants from the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, the group of researchers is led by Richard Sayre, a professor of plant cellular and molecular biology at Ohio State University. Sayre presented an update on the BioCassava Plus project June 30 at the American Society of Plant Biologists meeting in Mérida, Mexico.
"This is the most ambitious plant genetic engineering project ever attempted," Sayre said. "Some biofortification strategies have the objective of providing only a third of the daily adult nutrition requirements since consumers typically get the rest of their nutritional requirements from other foods in their diet. But global
food prices have recently gone sky high, meaning that many of the poorest people are now eating just one meal a day, primarily their staple food.

"So what we're working on has become even more important in the last year than it was when we started, not just in regions where people are malnourished, but across developing countries where food has gotten so expensive that people can't afford the diverse diet that they're used to."

Cassava (Manihot esculenta) is the primary source of calories for an estimated 800 million people worldwide, including 250 million people in sub-Saharan Africa, the current focus of the Gates-funded project. But the plentiful crop has several drawbacks. It is composed almost entirely of carbohydrates so it does not provide
complete nutrition.

"So what we're working on has become even more important in the last year than it was when we started, not just in regions where people are malnourished, but across developing countries where food has gotten so expensive that people can't afford the diverse diet that they're used to."

The roots can be banked in the ground for up to three years, providing food security, but the plant must undergo time-consuming processing immediately after harvest to remove compounds that generate cyanide. Unprocessed roots also deteriorate within 48 hours after harvest, limiting the food's shelf life. And a plant disease caused by the geminivirus reduces yields by 30 percent to 50 percent
in many areas in sub-Saharan Africa, a major blow to farm productivity.

Sayre and colleagues from multiple institutions set out to tackle virtually all of cassava's problems to make the plant more nutritious and to increase the crop's revenue-producing potential for farmers.

Sayre reported that the research team has been able to address each of the plant's deficiencies in individual transgenic plants. The next step will be to combine some or all of the bioengineered traits into a single, farmer-preferred cultivar, with the goal of eventually developing cassava varieties that carry all of the improvements developed by the researchers.

"We've begun field trials in Puerto Rico to make sure the plants perform as well outside as they do in greenhouses, and we hope to start field trials in the target countries of Nigeria and Kenya by 2009," Sayre said.

The labs in the project have used a variety of techniques to improve on the model cassava plant used for the research. They used genes that facilitate mineral transport to produce a cassava root that accumulates more iron and zinc from the soil. To fortify the plants with a form of vitamin E and beta-carotene (also called pro-vitamin A because it converts to vitamin A in the body), the scientists
introduced genes into the plant that increase terpenoid and carotenoid production, the precursors for pro-vitamin A and vitamin E. They achieved a 30-fold increase in pro-vitamin A, which is critical for human vision, bone and skin health, metabolism and immune function.

Adding protein to the cassava plant has posed a challenge, Sayre said. The scientists discovered that most of the nitrogen required to make the amino acids used for protein synthesis in roots is derived from the cyanogens that also cause cyanide toxicity. So their strategy for increasing protein levels in roots focuses on accelerating the conversion of cyanide-containing compounds into protein rather than completely eliminating cyanogen production, which would hinder the efforts to increase protein production, Sayre explained. To further address the cyanide problem, the scientists have also developed a way to accelerate the processing methods required to remove cyanide -- a days-long combination of peeling,
soaking and drying the roots before they are eaten.

To strengthen the cassava plant's resistance to viruses, the scientists introduced a protein and small interfering RNA molecules that interfere with the viruses' ability to reproduce. Prolonging cassava's shelf life has involved the development of a
hybrid species that crosses two related plants native to Texas and Brazil. The strategy, still in development, will combine the properties of these plants and additional genes that function as antioxidants, slowing the rotting process that has been traced to the production of free radicals that damage and kill cells in newly
harvested cassava roots.

The first cassava product the team plans to develop for investigations in the field will likely include the virus resistance, elevated protein, elevated beta-carotene (pro-vitamin A) and elevated minerals (iron and zinc), Sayre said.

"These traits have been working the best in the greenhouse, and the virus resistance is critical to success in the field," he said. "The thinking behind starting with these four traits is driven by science and by the impact they can have."

The BioCassava Plus project was launched with a $7.5 million grant from the Gates Foundation and recently received an additional $4.6 million in supplemental funding from the foundation to accelerate the application of this research in Africa by African scientists. The supplemental funding will support the training of African
scientists so they can produce the transgenic plants in African institutions for use on African farms.

"It will not only be an improved staple crop eaten as a main source of nutrition, but we're also looking at the transformation of cassava from a staple crop to an income-generating crop," Sayre said. "That lifts people out of poverty, allows families to send kids to school and build infrastructure in their villages, so this
is an important way to cross cultural barriers. There are many different cultures and languages in Africa, but higher crop yield, productivity, longer shelf life and making money are things that everyone understands." The BioCassava Plus research team includes Claude Fauquet, Nigel Taylor, Dan Shachtman, Ed Cahoon and Paul Anderson of the Donald Danforth Plant Science Center in St. Louis; Willi Gruissem and Peng Zhang of the Swiss Federal Institute of Technology in Zurich; John
Beeching of the University of Bath in England; John Fellman of Washington State University; Martin Fregene and Hernan Ceballos of the International Center for Tropical Agriculture in Colombia; Ivan Ingelbrecht, Alfred Dixon and Bussie Maziya-Dixon of IITA-Nigeria (an African research organization); Caroline Herron of IITA-Kenya; Simon Gichuki of the Kenya Agricultural Research Institute; Ada Mbanaso of the National Root Crops Research Institute in Nigeria; Dimuth Siritunga of the University of Puerto Rico; Mark Manary of Washington University; and independent consultant Jeff Stein. Mary Ann Abiado and Kristen Mosier of Ohio State provide administrative oversight.



__._,_.___

Posted 5:31 PM by Tevita
Are you on the Frontlines of Climate Change?
A Forum for Indigenous Peoples, Small Islands and Vulnerable Communities

From : On the Frontlines of Climate Change

Changing Climate – Shifting Seasons

The first posting on the Frontlines of Climate Change Forum asked people to send in their observations of climate change impacts. One theme raised by several contributors is how seasons are changing and becoming increasingly unpredictable. Below are highlights from this discussion:

I am very concerned about climate change, since I live on a small island in the middle of the Indian Ocean called Praslin, reports Michael Jean-Louis of the Seychelles. With the current climate change, what we have suffered from the most is the El Nino phenomenon. It has destroyed a large percentage of reef structures due to coral bleaching, which in turn affects tourism and the fish population. The reef structure acts as a barrier whereby waves crash on it and dissipate most of their energy. After the great El Nino of 1998, this coral barrier has been structurally weakened and in some instances has collapsed. The barrier is lower and less effective at wave breaking. So now more water with more energy is coming into the lagoon and this is creating, to a certain degree, coastal erosion.

Climate change has had adverse affects on water availability in parts of India, notes S.K. Sharma. Famed as the world’s wettest point because of its abundant rainfall, Cheerapunji remained unusually dry during 2006. The glaciers in Ladakh, which account for 13% of Kashmir’s land area, are now fast receding. The impacts of these changes, including on agriculture, are already visible in India.

During the last few decades, the hurricane season has become more extreme, writes Solangel Gonzalez from the Dominican Republic (Caribbean). Last year, the Dominican Republic was struck by two tropical storms during October and November, with precipitation in some parts of the country exceeding regular monthly levels by as much as 300%. The storm Olga happened out of season - during December. Precipitation patterns are changing. During a normal year, the highest rainfall occurs in May, but this year May was dry.

The rains that once fell between March and September have now been reduced to only thrice or four times a year, writes Nataan Lomorukai from western Kenya. Subject to drought and famine for the last two decades, the vast and arid Turkana District - once a savannah - is now a no-go zone. The water table is sinking and pastoralists have to trek up to 70 kms in search of water. Climate change is worsening problems already created by human activity. Irrigation and hydropower schemes have reduced the flows of the Omo and Turkwell rivers and contributed to the decline of Lake Turkana. This has resulted in the dying of indigenous trees and plants along the river where the Turkana people live. Even tree pods which enabled the livestock to live are no more. Animals are dying from the severe drought. Furthermore, the famous Ferguson Gulf in Lake Turkana – once a breeding ground for tilapia fish - has disappeared. The fisherfolk in the area now have nothing to eat. The area once occupied by the Gulf has been invaded by foreign plants called acacia prosophis. When local donkeys eat them, they become toothless after some months and die. Inhabitants have opted to move to urban areas to work as labourers, while others have resorted to making charcoal from the dying trees to supply refugee camps in Kakuma and urban areas. Turkanas are now dependant on emergency relief aid from the international community through the World Food Programme as a result of this catastrophe.

Posted 3:35 PM by Tevita
The Appetite for Biofuel Starves the Poor

Published on Friday, July 4, 2008 by The Guardian/UK

by Benjamin Senauer

The evidence linking biofuel production to rising food prices can’t be ignored. Between the start of 2002 and early 2008, basic global food commodity prices rose by 220%. The global production of biofuels - ethanol and bodiesel - rose from less than 8m gallons in 2004 to an estimated 18m gallons in 2008. The most rapid increase has been in the production of ethanol derived from corn in the US: rising from about 3.5m gallons in 2004 to an estimated 9m in 2008. This year ethanol production is forecast to consume 30% or more of 2008’s entire US corn crop.

Because of the surging price of agricultural commodities, Josette Sheeran, the executive director of the World Food Program, has warned that a “tsunami of hunger” is sweeping through the poorer countries of the world. Robert Zoellick, the president of the World Bank, has said that as many as 100 million people in the world have been forced into poverty and hunger because of the dramatic increase in food prices. These are people who live on the equivalent of less than $1 a day and whose households spend 70% or more of their meagre budgets on basic food staples. A debate is raging over the role biofuels, especially corn-based ethanol, have played in increasing food prices, and hence in the rising number of people going hungry.

Ed Schafer, the US Secretary of Agriculture, has said that biofuels account for only a few percent of the rise in the price of food, an estimate that would seem unbelievably low. One of the most reliable independent estimates comes from the International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI). IFPRI maintains the most sophisticated model of global agricultural commodity supply and utilization, referred to by the acronym Impact. Based on that model, IFPRI estimates that 30% of the increase in the prices of the major grains is due to biofuels. And now we learn that the World Bank’s own unpublished forecasts suggest that biofuels have forced global food prices up by 75%.

The increasing US output of ethanol, by raising the price of corn, pulls land from the production of other crops and leads to substitutions elsewhere, so more wheat and other grains may be used to feed livestock. Moreover, for many countries food price inflation is so high that it has become a serious political problem. There have been food riots and protests in over 15 developing countries. A number of major food-producing countries have restricted their agricultural exports in an attempt to hold down the increase in domestic prices. India and Vietnam, usually major rice exporters, have cut off exports, thus reducing the global supply and pushing rice prices through the roof on world markets.

Grains are the staple food of most people in the developing world, although which particular cereal depends on the region. We can combine IFPRI’s estimate that biofuels account for 30% of the rise in grain prices and the World Bank president’s figure of 100 million more hungry people due to higher food prices. This combination suggests that biofuels are responsible for 30 million more people going hungry in the world. The IFPRI model also allows us to estimate the number of malnourished children less than age five under various conditions. Based on the model there are some 2.4 million more malnourished pre-schoolers in the developing countries in 2008 due to the impact of biofuels. Current research, that I and colleagues are working on, suggests that 390,000 additional children under the age of five will die because of this increase in malnutrition due to biofuels. If current biofuel development trends continue, child deaths will rise to 475,000, almost one-half million by 2010. If the leaked World Bank figures are more accurate, then that figure could be even higher.

Oxfam has called for a moratorium on biofuel mandates, and an end to subsidies - under the latest US farm bill the ethanol subsidy is 45 cents per gallon. Even the International Monetary Fund calls for a re-examination of these subsidies. The biofuel policies of the presumptive candidates for the US presidency have received little attention so far. However, both Barack Obama and John McCain need to re-examine their positions in light of the devastating impact biofuels are having on global hunger.

Benjamin Senauer is a professor of applied economics at the University of Minnesota. These are the personal views of the author and do not necessarily reflect the position of the University of Minnesota.

© Guardian News and Media Limited 2008

rom ; The Guardian