GM Crops in India – Bt Cotton Experience, HT Crops and Regulatory Debate

What Are GM Crops?

Genetic modification in crops involves inserting, deleting, or modifying genes using recombinant DNA technology, CRISPR, or other tools. The modifications are designed to produce traits such as:

• Insect resistance (Bt crops — internal production of insecticidal proteins)

• Herbicide tolerance (HT crops — survive herbicide sprays)

• Drought/salinity tolerance

• Enhanced nutrition (e.g., Golden Rice — Vitamin A fortified)

• Disease resistance (virus-resistant papaya)

Bt Cotton: India's Experience

Bt cotton, developed by Monsanto-Mahyco, was approved for commercial cultivation in 2002. It incorporates genes from the soil bacterium Bacillus thuringiensis that produce Cry proteins — toxic to cotton bollworm but harmless to other organisms.

• Adoption surge: From 50,000 hectares (2002) to 11.6 million hectares by 2014; over 95% of cotton acreage today.

• Initial success: Bollworm infestations dropped dramatically; cotton yields rose; pesticide use reduced significantly.

• Pink bollworm resistance: By 2015, pink bollworm developed resistance to Cry1Ac. Farmers shifted to Bollgard II. Resistance to Bollgard II is now also emerging.

• Farmer distress: Despite yield gains, cotton farming remained vulnerable to price volatility, input costs (seed royalties), and non-bollworm pests.

• Policy controversy: Seed royalty disputes led to government intervention to cap royalties under ECA 1955.

Bt Brinjal: Political Moratorium

In 2009, GEAC approved commercial release of Bt brinjal (engineered with Cry1Ac), developed by Mahyco (Monsanto JV) in partnership with public institutions. Despite GEAC clearance, then-Environment Minister Jairam Ramesh placed it under an indefinite moratorium in 2010 after nationwide public consultations. He cited:

• Concerns over long-term effects on human health and biodiversity

• Lack of independent testing protocols

• Inadequacy of GEAC's environmental impact assessments

Bt brinjal has still not been commercially released, and remains a reference point in Indian GMO debates.

GM Mustard (DMH-11): The Legal Battle

DMH-11 is a transgenic mustard hybrid developed at Delhi University's Centre for Genetic Manipulation of Crop Plants using Barnase-Barstar-Bar gene system. It is classified as an HT crop since the Bar gene confers herbicide (phosphinothricin) resistance. It promises a 25–30% yield improvement.

• October 2022: GEAC recommended approval for environmental release.

• November 2022: Supreme Court ordered status quo in response to PILs.

• 2024: Supreme Court bench gave a split verdict — Justice Nagarathna quashed GEAC approval; Justice Karol allowed field trials. The matter is under further litigation.

• Controversy: Critics argue HT crops promote chemical herbicide use, harm soil biota, threaten bee pollination (used in mustard for hybridisation), and threaten organic farming. Proponents argue India imports $2 billion worth of edible oils annually; DMH-11 could boost self-sufficiency.

HtBt Cotton: The Illegal Spread

Herbicide Tolerant Bt (HtBt) cotton, incorporating the Cp4-EPSPS gene making plants resistant to glyphosate, was never approved by GEAC but spread illegally across states like Gujarat, Telangana, and Maharashtra. An estimated 15–25% of cotton acreage in India now has illegal HtBt traits. This raises serious concerns:

• Regulatory failure and enforcement gaps

• Herbicide-resistant weed evolution

• Unknown ecological and health risks

Important Concepts/Subtopics

Regulatory Architecture

• GEAC (Genetic Engineering Appraisal Committee): Apex body under MoEFCC; approves environmental release of GM organisms

• RCGM (Review Committee on Genetic Manipulation): Under DBT; reviews contained research and confined field trials

• IBSC (Institutional Biosafety Committee): At institutional level; first tier of review

• Environment Minister: Must ratify GEAC recommendations — introduces political discretion

Key Arguments: For and Against GM Crops

Arguments in favour:

• Food security: India needs to double food production by 2050

• Yield enhancement: Higher productivity on same land reduces pressure on forests

• Reduced pesticide use: Bt crops reduce chemical insecticide applications

• Climate resilience: GM traits can help crops withstand drought, heat, and salinity

Arguments against:

• Biodiversity loss: Gene flow to wild relatives; loss of traditional varieties

• Corporate monopoly: Seed patents concentrate power with multinational corporations

• Long-term health: Insufficient data on multigenerational dietary safety

• Farmer dependence: Non-renewable seeds create dependency on seed companies

• Ecological risks: Insecticide resistance evolution; unintended harm to non-target species

Current Relevance

• Supreme Court split verdict on DMH-11 (2024): Governance vacuum in India's GMO regulation

• India's edible oil import bill: ~$20 billion annually — GM mustard's promise of self-sufficiency is relevant

• Genome editing (SDN-1/SDN-2) exempted (2022): New frontier beyond traditional GMO debate

• CAG and parliamentary standing committee reports: Have flagged inadequacy of GEAC as a regulatory body

• Bt cotton resistance to pink bollworm (Parbhani region, Maharashtra): Need for next-generation Bt variants