Professor Bruce M. Chassy, Executive Associate Director of the Biotechnological Center at the University of Illinois, USA, during his recent India visit, made a presentation - the Future of Food and Agriculture - at the American Centre, Mumbai. In a lucid and detailed interview to Tripti Chakravorty, he talked about various challenges the food and allied industries the world over and especially those in India have been facing and the strategies required to turn them into opportunities. Excerpts.

Modern agricultural and food businesses are at the cutting edge of technology. How can India stand to gain from it?

According to the UN Population Information Network, 3-4 billion people will be added to the world's 6.5 billion inhabitants in the next 25-30 years (1). The great majority of this growth will take place in developing countries such as India. Most of the world's land that is suitable for farming is already being farmed; 11 percent of the land surface of the globe is dedicated to agriculture (2). We are, however, losing farmed land at the rate of 1.6 percent per annum due to factors such as urbanization, desertification, and loss of soil fitness and fertility (as for example, salt build up in irrigated soils). One cannot overlook the fact that 221 million Indians are today undernourished and hungry (3). Perhaps 70 percent of these are poor farmers who cannot presently grow enough food each year to feed their families.

Development leads to demand for a greater variety of food and higher quality food. The more disposable income individuals have, they are more likely to eat outside their homes, or consume packaged prepared foods. These changes are usually accompanied by a shift away from preparation of foods at home using purchased commodity ingredients, commonly understood as a shift away from home-cooking. The phenomenon leads to a demand for new and different products from the food industry. It also happens that more affluent consumers tend to consume more animal protein in their diets.

The consequences of a growing population and increasing consumption driven by rising incomes will require us to double the world's food production by 2025. This cannot be done by putting more land to the plough, so it must be accomplished by increasing the productivity of each hectare of land that we farm. India is among quite a number of developing countries whose agricultural yields per hectare are less well below levels, can be optimally achieved. That is not to say that India's best-farmed fields are not as productive as any in the worldIndia has an abundance of good farmland. It is noteworthy that globally, 1/3 or more of potential crop yields are lost to pests, disease, suboptimal crop nutrition and adverse weather. Post-harvest losses rob the world of an additional 1/3 of the crop yield. The silver lining to this cloud is that here is obviously much room for improvement that will allow us to engineer the needed doubling of world food supplies.

In recent years, researchers have used the tools of biotechnologysometimes called molecular biology or recombinant DNA technologyto produce improved crop varieties. It is possible to introduce genes that encode useful and beneficial traits using these genetic engineering techniques. These enhanced crops are known to the public as GMOs (Genetically Modified Organisms). Scientists call them as transgenic crops since all of our crops are already extensively genetically modified. Scientists see genetic engineering as a powerful addition to the tools they use to improve crop plants. It has been possible to produce crop plants which resist insects without the use of pesticides, weeds can now be managed with environmentally friendly pesticides, and crops can resist virus diseases. Bt-cotton is an insect protected cotton plant that more than three million Indian farmers are now planting. They find with these transgenic cotton varieties that they get greatly increased yields and profitabilityin part because they use little or no pesticides (which are not only a major cost, an environmental problem, and often a heath problem for farmers who most work with toxic pesticides). Around the world, transgenic cotton, corn, soybean, and oilseed rape have been farmed on more than one billion hectares over the last 12 years by more than 10.5 billion farmers (4). These farmers have realized significant increases in productivity per hectare and have pocketed a net total of $27 billion in added profits (5). In the near future, crops that are resistant to drought and heat stress, crops which require less fertilizer, or which can grow in salt water or salty soils will be introduced. Other new varieties such as Golden Rice will provide better nutrition for consumersespecially those who are malnourished.

Given the global and local situation, the need for increased productivity in agriculture, and the rising demand for food, it is impossible to imagine how India will meet this challenge without using all of the best and newest technologies. In that regard, agricultural biotechnology is but one piece of the puzzle. Far from being a magic bullet that will solve all the ills of agriculture, it should be viewed as one of many technologies that must be brought to bear on the problem. In context, GMOs can help us produce more food in a more environmentally sustainable way. Agricultural production also needs a ready availability of water, an economical way to provide soil nutrients, good roads and transportation infrastructure, easy access to inexpensive credit for farmers, good post-harvest storage facilities, and profitable markets-- among others. The food and agricultural system is a complex interactive system that will require much attention and improvement in the coming decades, and for which there is no one quick fix or remedy.

Indian food industry is preparing for a radical shift. What are your views on this?

My view is that these changes are inevitable. Historically, as other countries have undergone economic development, their food production systems and marketplace have radically evolved as well. How these evolve in India will no doubt be the result of uniquely Indian resources, Indian culture, and Indian consumer demand. In agrarian societies there are few packaged food products available to the consumer, and often the availability of a few simple ingredients, fresh fruits and vegetables varies throughout the year. The key concept of change in developing economies is changing with growing consumer demand. For a consumer, the market changes from selecting between a few available products at an open market, to walking the aisles of a supermarket lined with 50,000 or more products. Affluence means that consumers make far more choices about food and can begin to dictate which will succeed in the food marketplace and which will fail. For the food and agriculture industries, this means a change from a supply driven market to a consumer driven market. The new consumer expects food to be safe, to taste good, and to be an enjoyable experience---they are no longer eating simply to sustain themselves. The consumer is king in the new food market place.

The companies who understand consumer desires and provide consumers with attractively packaged, good tasting products that are safe, reliable and easy to prepare may do well if they have also managed raw material costs, production costs, training, regulatory compliance, and marketing. The real winners will be the companies who bring consumers new pleasures with foods that they never even realized they wanted. It must be stressed, however, that the single most important attribute of food is that it be safe and nutritious. The affluent consumer demands safety and wholesomeness. After that consistency and predictability are a must. The best of India's food companies produce outstanding products: tasty, attractive, safe, and consistent. A sizeable portion of the food marketed in the country has not yet achieved those high standards. Food borne illness, contamination, and inconsistent product performance have not been eliminated from the Indian food marketplace. Consistent quality demands warrant a quality conscious mindset, training and a strong regulatory system that promise consumers safe and wholesome food.

There are astounding possibilities in the business of food at the international level. One such is the global pricing which is higher than the local/domestic pricing levels. How can India capitalize on it?

There are several key concepts. The first is consistent conformity with internationally accepted norms of safety and quality such as those embodied in the ISO 9001, ISO14000 and other relevant ISO standards. OECD and Codex Alimentarius provide additional guidelines. The global food market demands safe products; increasingly, it demands green products made by environmentally conscious companies. The development of a safety firstquality always mindset that is backstopped by a reputable food safety regulatory authority is essential. These needs may be met in the short term by partnership agreements in which the buyer provides in-country on-site certification and training. It is also becoming increasingly common for out of country buyers to inspect in-country records and its keeping and production. The US Consulate provides an interface with US regulatory requirements. Recently, the FDA (Food and Drug Administrationthe US food regulatory authority) opened an office in China to help Chinese producers understand the requirements for food exports to the US. The EU has a similar interest in assisting exporters meet EU standards.

The need for quality and consistencyconsistent supply as well as consistent performance (taste, looks, texture, dimensions, etc) cannot be overstated. Quality and safety are attributes that must be built into the food production system, they cannot be added later. They are also the product of a corporate culture that must be developed and sustained. Successful food giants such as Unilever, Nestle, DANONE, and Kraft have built this cultural commitment to excellence and as a consequence their products can be found throughout the world. Indian companies that can build a reputation for safety, quality and consistency will prosper in the world marketespecially if they can provide products with a uniquely Indian spin on them that appeal to consumers, and/or if these products represent a real value: low cost, great performance.

The simple answer to the question is that Indian companies that meet all the expectations of foreign consumers, and do it at a lower cost, will have a bright future. Those that provide lower cost at the expense of safety or quality will fall by the wayside.

Story of pricing lies in Supply Chain Management acting as an intermediary between producers i.e. farmer and end users. How do you think this issue can be resolved?
Frankly, I do not think so. Globally, there is a constant tension between agricultural producers and supply chains. Farmers always feel their products are undervalued. The supply chain shops around for the lowest price. The greatest portion of the assets, revenues, and profits in the food system are in the hands of the supply chains, processors and retailers. The farm revenues are a small part of the food system. The power, therefore, lies in the hands of the buyer and the supply chain. As I said, I cannot see this changing. I am reminded of what some have called the Golden Rule of Markets: he who has the gold rules.

There is one exception that is worth noting. As I have said earlier, quality, safety and consistency of supply are essential to the downstream manufacturers. Supply chains in many countries are increasingly contracting with farmers to grow specific crops for them in return for a promise of guaranteed income. This is a win-win proposition that ensures supply for the system and insulates the farmers from a host of market forces that are largely outside of their control. I would call this a trend.

Dietary habits are increasingly western, mainly in urban India. How could that be turned to India's advantage?

One obvious advantage to food companies is that it may make it possible to produce some of the same products for domestic consumption as for export. This is not always the case, however, since even very similar products need to be adapted to local tastes. The production of Western products also builds capacity and know-how for export markets. Fusion products that are Western but which incorporate typical Indian spices and styles may also be market opportunities.

From a nutritional scientist's point of view, this trend to consume more Western food may not be the so desirable if it means that Indians will consume more fat and refined sugars. The traditional Indian diet is a reasonably healthy one. Although it is somewhat high in carbohydrates, the Indian diet takes advantage of health benefits of fruits, vegetables, pulses, seeds and nuts to provide consumers a diet high in needed health beneficial nutrients, micronutrients and fiber. It would be unfortunate if total dietary change were to lead to increased incidence of high blood pressure or cardiovascular diseases that plague Western consumers who are just now learning to eat a healthier diet. As is true for so many things, moderation is the key. If the consumption of Western foods that please the palate is balanced with a continued intake of traditional ingredients, the Indian diet will remain healthy and will become more varied and fun to consume.

What are your opinions on the recently released India Food Report 2008 and Vision 2020?

I am not an expert on India so I will refer to their observations and findings. I emerged from a quick read of them with the sense that Indian observers understand the complexity and diversity of food issues confronting the Indian subcontinent and the large number of factors that must be managed simultaneously. India faces some major production challenges in the coming years: sufficient food, safe food, healthy food.

Perhaps it will come as no surprise since I come from an educational institution that I believe education, and particularly education of women, is the key to both, development, controlling birthrates and producing enough food.

What are the environmental impacts of our food production systems? How can they be minimized?

We can all agree on two things. The first is that we want to preserve as much of the natural environment that remains as we can and the second is that we all want enough food to eat. In a very fundamental way, these two are sometimes at odds with one another. By this I mean, that when we put an hectare of wild grassland or tropical forest to the plough, we loose an hectare of natural biodiversity that will never be reclaimed. All agriculture has an impact of the environment, but yet, we must eat. In recent years the need to reduce the environmental footprint of agriculture has come clearly into focus. Agriculturists are attempting to reduce the use of toxic chemicals in agriculture, to reduce greenhouse gas emissions; water loses and soil erosion, among others. Not only do policymakers and the consuming public demand reduction in the environmental impact of agriculture, many educated farmers have realized that the very sustainability of their livelihood demands it.

One the major benefits of the transgenic plants that I spoke of earlier is that they directly reduce the environmental footprint and greenhouse gas emissions from agriculture. Brookes and Barfoot, two English economists, have published a peer-reviewed study that documents the benefits of the first 10 years of planting GMO crops (5). The summary of their paper says it all:

“Genetically modified (GM) crops have been grown commercially on a substantial scale for eleven years. This paper updates the assessment of the impact this technology is having on global agriculture from both economic and environmental perspectives. It examines specific global economic impacts on farm income and environmental impacts associated with pesticide usage and greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions for each of the countries where GM crops have been grown since 1996. The analysis shows that there have been substantial net economic benefits at the farm level amounting to $6.94 billion in 2006 and $33.8 billion for the eleven-year period (in nominal terms). The technology has reduced pesticide spraying by 286 million kg and, as a result, decreased the environmental impact associated with herbicide and insecticide use on these crops by 15.4 percent. GM technology has also significantly reduced the release of GHG emissions from this cropping area, which, in 2006, was equivalent to removing 6.56 million cars from the roads.”

Somewhat inexplicably, the world environmental movement that is represented by Civil Organizations such as Greenpeace, remains steadfastly opposed to GMOs. They see GMOs as an extension of what they call industrial agriculture and they blame that kind of agriculture for all sorts of environmental degradation almost without regard to the necessity to feed 6.5 billion people. They advocate a switch to organic agriculture that they claim is environmentally friendly and sustainable. It is not! Not only does the body of scientific evidence not support their assertion, it is obvious at face value that organic agriculture is not an alternative. It is not sustainable, it cannot produce enough food to feed 1/3 of the world's population, it is less productive per unit area which is per se bad for the environment, it has other environmental pitfalls, it emits more greenhouse gases, and in the end the food is not more safe of nutrition than conventional foods and is arguably less safe than GMOs. The facts are so against organic agriculture that one wonders if Greenpeace is a paid front organization of the organic merchants. Upon careful examination, Organic Agriculture turns out to be a chic fad for affluent people who are too far removed from agriculture to understand the issues, and who can afford to pay 2X or 3X as much for food that will feed their illusions. But it is a cruel hoax to the world's hungry who must watch precious agricultural resources wasted on folly.

It has been estimated that the future wars in the world are going to be on the depleting levels of water. What is your take on this and what effects it would have on the food industry worldwide?

This is a key question. It is said that much of the struggle in the Middle East for the last 60 years has been as much about water rights as land. There is simply not enough fresh water in the world and water resources are falling rapidly. Since agriculture accounts for 70 percent of fresh water use, the production of food depends directly on water availability. Food processing, food preparation and food service account for an additional 10 percent of the water use. And humans need at least a liter a day of water to survive. It is not an exaggeration to say that water is the stuff of life. Little wonder then that we see water as a potential source of conflict.

Although it may not seem so at times with Pakistani troops firing daily across the LOC in Kashmir, or Russian and Georgian troops facing off in South Ossetia, we live in a world that is increasingly turning away from conflict and towards collaboration. While water resources may remain contentious for years to come, we live on the water planet. There is no shortage of water, the earth's surface is 70percent covered with water, what we are facing is a short-term shortage of fresh water. A serious situation but not an insurmountable one. As noted above, scientists have developed drought-tolerant transgenic plants that need less water and this, coupled with improved productivity per acre, will lower the agricultural demand for water. More strikingly, although rice alone accounts for 50 percent of the world's annual fresh water usage, researchers have developed systems for dry rice production that eliminate the need for paddies and require very little water. Solar and atomic powered conversion of seawater to fresh water is also becoming an economical reality.

With a progressive biotechnological policy in place, why are Indian-made innovations in biotech products still not globally received?

Although I am not an expert with regard to the actual Indian situation and should probably not answer this questionI am a food safety expert, not a trade economist, I would imagine that there remain structural impediments to the industry that could include taxes and over-regulation. Biotechnology needs a free market economy and a robust commercial infrastructure to flourish. I don't know if these are the problems for India but they are elsewhere. I am fairly certain that it is not a lack of trained people or entrepreneursthere are plenty of those in India.

As regards to the global marketplace, I can only point out that it responds to a good value proposition. If a supplier provides good product and favorable prices, success should follow. There is little national bias in today's international markets when profit is at stake.

Biotechnology is still a sunrise sector in India, how can the US help?

There are 88,000 Indians studying in American Universities at this very moment, many of them are studying sciences and engineering (and marketing for that matter) relevant to biotechnology. These kinds of numbers have been true for some time. Moreover, Indian students, and professional NRIs have been part of the biotechnology revolution in the US for the last 30 years. They collaborated in much of the research, staff our companies and universities, and their names appear on patents and product credits. Many of them collaborate with colleagues in India, and others have returned home to spawn biotech companies in India. I am thinking, for example, of people like Dr. Anil Ghosh in Kolkata, who after working at MIT in the US, returned to India to found a biotech company and is now working on developing a biotechnology research park in India. So in point of fact, Indians have been a crucial part of the development of this science.

The US can help by continuing to do what it has always done: participate in training, collaborate in research, partner where there is opportunity, and buy products when the price it right. I would like to think that part of that help could take the form of exchange of experts such as myself, and exchanges supported by the recently expanded India-US Fulbright program, that are supported by the US Department of State, the US Embassy in New Delhi, and our Consulate here in Mumbai will continue to add value to Indian Biotechnology efforts.