)
Robert Fraley, Chief Technology Officer, Monsanto, is a recipient of the prestigious World Food Prize. Some have critisised the fact only those from multinational seed companies have won the award.
In an interview with Sanjeeb Mukherjee, Fraley says the award is won only by individuals who have advanced human development by improving the quality, quantity or availability of food. Edited excerpts:
Today, plant biotechnology is deeply divided between pro- and anti-genetically modified (GM) crop people. Do you think this disagreement is hurting the interests of science?
The need for food security and the opportunity for farmers to meet growing demand are much more important than any difference of opinion we may have.
I’m honoured and very thankful for the recognition of modern agricultural biotechnology by the World Food Prize. More importantly, I’m excited about the opportunity this recognition has provided in offering a platform to engage in a dialogue on how we can use science and the tools available to enable a sustainable food supply for all.
I look forward to participating in discussions about what we can do better, what else we need to do and how we can come together to reach that important middle ground.
Does this mean you are willing to reach middle ground between the arguments put forward by pro- and anti-GM activists?
There is a need to set aside the differences we may have so that the focus is on the challenges we face and on delivering real solutions that would help us overcome those challenges. We need to be open to dialogue on how we can use technology, including biotechnology in some cases, to help farmers produce more.
As an industry, we also need to do a better job discussing the benefits biotechnology and other technologies bring, as well as where these technologies can be applied effectively. These are the types of dialogues Fraley is looking forward to.
Overall, it’s about everyone coming to the table to focus on solutions to the challenges we face.
Monsanto has been criticised for various reasons. Do you think being associated with a company that has faced allegations clouds your scientific prowess?
My focus is on the reality that we have a growing planet with shifting diets. With this comes the need to boost the quantity and availability of food. Just as important is the need to do this sustainably, by not clearing forests or wetlands, as well using the land and other resources we have more efficiently.
This leads us back to farmers and the need to help them produce more using the best tools they can gain access to. That’s where our focus is and this is what drives the efforts of our research teams around the world.
Critics say the World Food Prize is the domain of big companies; those who oppose GM technology but are doing excellent work in alternative fields are seldom recognised.
For clarity, Monsanto did not win this prize. The World Food Prize goes to individuals who have advanced human development by improving the quality, quantity or availability of food.
The prize is rooted to the dream of Norman E Borlaug; he had envisioned a prize that would honour those who have made significant and measurable contributions to improving global food supply. This year’s prize would be awarded to three scientists who are known as pioneers of agricultural biotechnology.
Do you think the fact that you are chief technology officer of Monsanto diminishes your achievements, as a few critics say?
I’ve had the privilege to work at Monsanto for more than 30 years and couldn’t think of any other place I’d rather be in. I am extremely proud of the work I’ve been involved in throughout my career, as well as for the chance to work with farmers to find solutions to some of the world’s biggest challenges.
What is the future of GM crops, considering in many countries such as India, there is no movement in this segment?
When I reflect on where agriculture was when I started my career and where we are today, I’m astounded. It’s something I always hoped for in the early days of my career.
While I was confident and optimistic, it has certainly exceeded my early expectations. Last year alone, more than 17 million farmers in about 30 countries planted biotech crops. These included more than six million farmers in India.
While that is incredible progress, I really believe we have just started to scratch the surface on what is possible in bringing innovation to farmers around the world.
As the world increasingly faces food shortages and the dependence on quality food increases, do you think it is prudent to rely only on a single technology such as plant biotechnology to solve all shortages? Should we use a combination of approaches?
The benefits and fast adoption of biotech crops in countries around the world speaks of the value these products bring to farmers. I’m confident the technology would continue to be an important tool for farmers.
However, it has always been our belief that biotechnology is just one of the tools that can help farmers grow more food and do it more sustainably.
To meet (consumer) demand, it would take multiple approaches and continued innovation within the entire toolbox of solutions---seed breeding, biotechnology, and agronomic practices, as well as new partnerships.
