Team members Muhammad Dawood, Ushma Farooq, Hassan Raza, Hassnain Qasim, Ayesha Khan and Babar Nawaz were awarded a Silver medal at an award ceremony that was held at the Hynes Convention Center in Boston.

The global iGEM contest based on synthetic biology is a five-day event featuring oral presentations, poster presentations, workshops and social events.

This year’s participants were encouraged to design projects in the environmental/social context. The iGEM Peshawar team developed a “Reporter Fish” that is genetically engineered to detect mental contamination in water. The fish will change its color once it comes into contact with water contaminated with heavy metals or other pollutants – an indication that the waterbody is too polluted to support a population of fish for human consumption. The team self-engineered the genetic circuits for the said characteristic and tested its viability in bacterial cells. The project also featured a sensor system that alarms farmers through a text message upon detection of contaminated water.

Today, polluted seafood is a serious environmental issue. It contains an increasing level of contaminants that are causing serious health problems. The iGEM Peshawar students believe that this technology can be used by fish farmers to combat the problem of unhealthy fish and provide produce which is safe for human consumption.

iGEM is a global event that has been running for over a decade. It encourages students to solve some of the world’s most serious problems by building genetically engineered biological systems. The Pakistani cohort competed with over 90 teams whose projects were featured at the event – it also had over 3,000 synthetic biologists.  Speaking about the experience Omer Zeb from Swabi said: “Being the only electrical engineer in the team working with the undergrad biologists of Pakistan was a good experience.” Another member of the team, Hassan Raza, from Faisalabad said the project would help in combating a pressing environmental issue – water pollution.

‘I am super proud of the team who put in a lot of effort to win us a Silver medal this time. A lot of thanks to the Government of KP and CECOS university for the sponsorship and the all-out support throughout the competition this year, said Dr. Faisal Khan team supervisor and the director of the Institute of Integrative Biosciences at CECOS University. ‘We hope our industry will join hands with us in IGEM 2018 like all other teams here from different countries’, he added.

This is the second time a Pakistani team has participated and won in this competition. Previously, the Pakistani team was awarded a bronze medal for devising a BioSensor that recorded carbon monoxide and nitrogen oxide levels being eliminated from vehicle exhausts.

Sources:

https://tribune.com.pk/story/1557867/1-pakistani-team-bag-silver-medal-igem-2017/

http://iib.cecos.edu.pk/igem-peshawar-17-wins-silver/

https://www.pakistankakhudahafiz.com/pakistani-biology-students-bag-bronze-medal-igem-world-championship/

This humble pen picked from Jan Piotrowski, specialist in science and technology issues, says food security is an issue that touches all aspects of the sustainable development agenda, from agriculture and environmental management to economics, governance and social equality.

He also stresses that food security is a challenge with no simple solution.

True to Piotrowski’s assertions, it is estimated that the world’s population will reach around nine billion by 2050, and as a result, demand for food is going to increase.

For that reason, the Southern African Development Community is not spared by this population growth, and would need to increase crop production since it has the greatest potential to feed this projected population.

Sadly, while the world population is growing, the amount of available cropland, fresh water and other key resources is not. The number of undernourished people, for instance, already exceeds one billion.

Providing solution to these and other pending challenges demands answers to these all-important question: “How do we feed the world without exacerbating environmental problems and simultaneously cope with climate change? How can the SADC region ensure everyone has access to enough safe and nutritious food? Can science help to improve food security in the regional bloc?”

British biochemist, Professor Douglas Kell, acknowledges that food security is a complex and wide-ranging challenge but science can play an important role in improving it. “New science, new genetics, genomics, genome sequencing, modern plant breeding techniques – all of these improve all aspects of sustainable food production,” says Kell.

Sharing same sentiments, the Food and Agricultural Organisation of the United Nations, says science is an essential contributor to solving the triangle of the global problems of hunger, poverty and environmental degradation.

“Without sound scientific input of different kinds, the challenges will not be addressed. Science, including the biological sciences and increasingly the social and physical sciences, must be applied to agriculture, fisheries, and forestry, and to those rural, coastal, and urban ecosystems and human systems within which hunger and poverty persist,” asserts FAO.

A researcher in plant sciences, Professor Dale Sanders, is of the view that science, especially plant science offers new ways to “sustainably increase crop yields, while at the same time reducing inputs such as fertiliser and pesticides.”

Further to that, Dr Achim Dobermann, soil scientist and agronomist, believes science is key in increasing food security, but so are policies and strategies. “Science can offer tools and strategies that are critical in increasing food security; science programmes for crop improvement are essential for future food security but policies must change, too,” says Dobermann.

However, not everyone supports the idea that increasing yields through scientific advance will deliver food security.

Tim Lang, an expert in food policy, says just focusing on the role science can play in increasing food production is ‘nonsense’.

“I belong to a school of analysis that says the problem of food security is not just scientific or technical, but the problem is societal, cultural and economic. This appeal that only science will resolve the food problem is, therefore, folly. It is bad policy,” he says.

Accordingly, Professor Lang calls for a greater focus on the social dimension of food policy – behaviour, consumption, expectations. “Policies should encourage farmers to adopt alternative strategies, and must be reformed to stimulate innovation, and access to new technologies,” he adds.

This means policy makers in countries within and across the SADC region must support research that improves lives and livelihoods of citizens. They need to focus on cutting edge technologies and state-of-the-art developments to guide the regional bloc to solutions in challenging areas.

However, in most – if not all – SADC countries, the ‘extension’ systems that bridge the gap between laboratories and farmers’ fields are often weak, forming major obstacles to the diffusion of scientific knowledge.

Therefore, governments, policy decision makers and other critical stakeholders must work to avert this challenge.

They simply need to collaborate across disciplines and across borders as science, to improve food security, needs more development.

Honestly, with proper planning, science can help improve food security not only in the SADC region but in the entire world. SADC countries must, therefore, harness the best technologies, building the required infrastructure, developing effective institutions and crafting appropriate policies with a view to realising the full potential of the region’s agrifood systems to contribute to broad-based economic growth.

Source: The Southern Times

The UAE is, of course, blessed with vast oil reserves but that commodity cannot in itself sustain the country except by providing the means to buy food from less arid regions or to artificially foster agriculture here using desalinated water. The population now is 7.9 million people but before oil was discovered and exported, the Trucial States sustained fewer than one million people.

The issue was quantified recently when the UAE was included for the first time in the The Economist Intelligence Unit’s Global Food Security Index, which put it in 30th place of 109 countries assessed. The score was based on three factors: food affordability, food availability and quality and safety.

However, that kind of standardized assessment does not sit comfortably with the unique situation here. The UAE received the lowest possible score for its investment in agriculture research and development, but the challenge is not improving local agricultural practices but, in ensuring the security of the supply chain, both from farms owned by the UAE in Africa, Europe and Asia and from external suppliers.

Although experiments have been held in Abu Dhabi in the last two years for the most suitable variety of wheat for local conditions, one need only look at a similar programme in Saudi Arabia, that depleted its groundwater to produce wheat at several times the price it would have cost, to import on the open market.

There is also a bigger issue that is not reflected in the food security score. By operating farms in places like East and North Africa, the UAE not only gains food security based on much more favourable conditions for agriculture but, is also able to introduce highly-efficient practices to countries, thanks to its understanding of the culture of the region that in many places are struggling to develop beyond subsistence agriculture.

It can do this in a more ethical and sustainable way than many other global agribusinesses. This would be a truly virtuous circle in which each side benefits.

Source: The National UAE

Improvement is evident across the globe, but particularly in developing countries, which generally started with more food-insecure environments. The 2014 Global Food Security Index (GFSI) displays these developments, revealing improvements within every region. Low- and lower-middle-income countries—particularly in Sub-Saharan Africa, which recorded the largest gains despite facing the weakest food security environment—led the way.

For the full report, click here.

The current definition of food security explains the concept as, the availability of food to individuals within national boundaries. That definition in some way, mandates governments to encourage individuals, and by extension, communities to engage in farming practices that will ensure their food security. What this means is, that rather than focus investment in commercial large scale farming, governments should search out ways of supporting local efforts at food security.

Tassa

At the core of agricultural efforts at the local and community level, is traditional farming techniques. Traditional or indigenous knowledge based agricultural practices, are easily accessible and inexpensive, and governments that have supported citizens to build-on or scale-up traditional farming practices, have recorded successes. An example that will be explored here, is the predominantly Muslim nation of Niger in West Africa, which has, by scaling-up a traditional irrigation technique known as Tassa, proven that food security at the community level need not be founded on expensive and difficult-to-sustain, imported western technology.

Niger is, by land mass, the largest nation in African South Sahara, with a 94 percent Muslim population. 80 percent of Niger’s land area of 1,270,000 km, is covered by the Sahara desert, making the arid nation much insecure in the area of food cultivation. Niger’s food insecurity situation, is reflected in its ranking consistently at the bottom in the United Nation’s Human Development Index (HDI) – 186th out of 186 countries ranked in 2012. Niger’s land locked position and the low level of education, has led to very poor quality of life for the country’s populace, reflected in the dearth of infrastructure, poor healthcare quality and environmental degradation.

Several failed attempts were made by the World Bank and other agricultural funding agencies, to commercially irrigate large areas of the patchy terrains of Niger . Through that process, the Government of Niger has incurred tremendous amount of debt, in efforts to apply western irrigation technology, in pushing back desertification, and to improve soil quality towards increased agricultural output. However, a simple, inexpensive and sustainable Nigerien traditional farming technique, known as Tassa, has succeeded tremendously in boosting household food security and holds substantial promises, if adequate investment is made, of mitigating agricultural risks.

Origin of Tassa

Tassa is a traditional practice in the Sahel, that is located in the use of planting pits to reclaim land lost, or about to be lost, to degradation. The modern and improved practice of Tassa in Niger, can be traced to the predominantly Muslim Yatenga province of Burkina Faso. Burkina Faso, it can be said, learnt the hard way: earlier on than Niger; in the 1960s and 1970s, international donors and multi-lateral institutions invested heavily in two unsuccessful major projects in the Yatenga province of Burkina Faso, aimed at reduction of soil erosion over thousands of hectares. The project was single handedly formulated and implemented by donors. Indigenous farming knowledge and practices of the Burkinabes, was considered of little or no use in policy action. The dismal failure of both projects, brought the Yatenga province back to a worsened state of soil erosion, across previously farmed spaces . Local farmers, left with no other alternative, resorted to the traditional practice of planting pits to check against soil erosion. Burkina Faso calls its planting pit Zai, and the successes experienced by farmers who utilized this age-long practice, include rehabilitation of tens of thousands of hectares of land and up to 94 per cent of cultivated land in the several villages, which adopted the practice.

Tassa in Niger

Thirteen local Nigerien farmers from Tahoua, went on a study tour of the Zai practice in Burkina Faso, in 1988. The farmers realized, that what they were learning, was a more developed variation of their own rarely used traditional land rehabilitation technique of planting pits. The farmers returned home and most decided, to revive their own traditional planting pit technique known as Tassa. With four hectares of land, which included a display field close to a major road, the farmers began a pilot Tassa project, that rapidly expanded to 70 hectares in that year alone . The farmers who cultivated using the Tassa technique, ended with a reasonably higher harvest than their peers, notwithstanding that it was a drought year. Tassa has been credited with the rehabilitation of thousands of hectares of land in Niger, and by 2008, had become “an integral part of the local farming scene and is still spreading at a rate of about two to three hectares per year.”

How Tassa Works

Tassa aims to fully rehabilitate severely degraded farmland, that is impenetrable by water. By digging a grid of planting pits on very hard – rock textured – soil. Nigerien farmers were innovative in their approach, by increasing the depth and diameter of the pits, and adding “organic matter, such as manure, to the bottom of the basins.” The planting pits are able to hold water for unusually extended periods of time, which then allow crops in the farmland to survive drought. Since farmers are able to dig the pits during dry season, the land is ready and waiting for cultivation, by the time rainy season approaches, cutting out several months of wait time. In addition to its previously enumerated benefits, Tassa has enabled Nigerien farmers to “effectively raise their yields from virtually nothing, to 300 to 400 kilograms per hectare in a year of low rainfall, and up to 1,500 kilograms or more per hectare in a good year.”

Conclusion

• Scaling-up traditional knowledge: Tassa has shown that communities, before seeking expensive and sometimes unsuitable foreign solutions to food security challenges, might do well to explore traditional knowledge based practices, that might have been forgotten or are rarely used.

• Independence from donors: Following successive failed efforts at an outside-in, and overly dependent approach to solving the problem of soil erosion and desertification, Nigerien farmers displayed a high level of single mindedness and independence, by searching out and reintroducing a hitherto ignored farming practice.

• Cooperation/interdependence among Muslim communities: By borrowing from another Muslim community in Burkina Faso, Nigerien farmers have leveraged on the social capital provided by religion, to tap into the indigenous resources of their Burkina Faso neighbors.

Chika Ezeanya Ph.D. is an Africa focused researcher, writer and public intellectual. Chika emphasizes indigenous knowledge and home-grown solutions in her writings on Africa, some of which can be read on her blog – www.chikaforafrica.com.

References:

1. Reij, C., G. Tappan, and M. Smale. 2009. Agroenvironmental Transformation in the Sahel: Another Kind of “Green Revolution.” IFPRI Discussion Paper. Washington, D.C.: International Food Policy Research Institute.

2. Belemvire, A.,A. Maiga, H. Sawadogo, M.Savadogo, and S. Oudrago. 2008. Evaluation des impacts biophysiques et socio-economiques des investissements dans les actions digestion des ressourves naturelles au Nord du Plateau Central du Burkina Faso. Rapport de synthese Etude Sahel Burkina Faso. Ouagadougou, Burkina Faso: Comite Permanenet Inter Etats pour la Lutte contre la Secheresse au Sahel.

3. IFAD. (1998). The Niger Special Country Programme – Phase 2 (PSN-11). Rome: IFAD.

5. IFAD. (2008). Tassa and Soil Fertility in Niger. Rome: IFAD.

6. Kabore, P.D., and C. Reij (2004). The Emergence and Spreading of an Improved Traditional Soil and Water Conservation Practice in Burkina Faso. Environment and Production Technology Division Discussion Paper No. 114. Washington, DC. International Food Policy Research Institute.

Humankind is facing big challenges in the form of Energy, water, poverty, education etc. The first millennium development goal (MDGs) as identified by the UN , was eradicating extreme poverty and hunger. To eradicate hunger, we need to achieve sustainable food security. According to Rio+20 – UN Conference on Sustainable Development, Food Security is defined as “when all people, at all times, have physical and economic access to sufficient, safe and nutritious food, to meet their dietary needs and food preferences for an active and healthy life” . Some people see genetically modified crops, as playing a big role, in helping to reach this goal.

What is GMO

Genetic modification is the technology, that employs genetic material from unrelated organisms and injects them into another organism (plant or animal), to confer the recipient organism new and desirable features i.e. higher yield, pest resistance, drought tolerance etc.

According to the ISAAA report , developing countries are at the top of the GMO production scale, with USA ranked number 1 in the production of genetically modified organisms, while Brazil is ranked second and Argentina is ranked 3rd. In the case of the Muslim world, only two countries are among the international GMOs producers: Pakistan, ranked 8th globally and Egypt ranked 24th.

At the moment, there are around 160 million hectares around the world cultivated with GMOs. Out of these, more than 30 million hectares are in Brazil and around 24 million hectares are in Argentina. The production is focused on Maize, soya beans and cottons. The Brazilian case, in particular, can be inspiring for many countries in the developing world. They started to use GM crops in the early 1990s and now Brazil has become the engine of GMOs growth around the world. Currently, Brazil cultivates around 50% of its lands with GM crops. They can now develop, deliver and approve a new state of the art biotech crop, with their own indigenous resources.

Lack of GMO’s in the Islamic World

The world is divided into two parties: one party is against the extensive use of GMOs, which is lead by the EU. They prefer organic matter and perceive it to be healthier. They are of the belief, that GMO’s do more harm than good. The second party, headed by the US, is supportive in using GMOs widely. They argue that GMO’s have no proven risks and hence, there is no harm in using them. A food security expert at a leading university in the US, Dr. David Comell, is of the opinion that “The GMO movement must continue. The worlds hunger is getting ridiculous. In such a case, the only solution is GMOs, GMOs and more GMOs.”

Positive outcomes of producing GMOs are the expected high yield, resistance to pests and drought tolerance. But those who are against GMOs think, that GMOs can introduce allergens and toxins into food, GMOs may lead to developing antimicrobial resistance, constitute risk to biodiversity, may lead to creation of superweeds (if the resistance genes transferred to weeds) and other environmental risks and it may cause adverse changes in the nutrient contents of crops.

Right or wrong?

In addition to the previous general concerns about GMOs in the Islamic world, another debate bordering on religious dogma, has surfaced in the Muslim world. This debate revolves around whether GMOs are religiously acceptable (‘halal’) for the Muslim community to consume. This is where opinions differ. Food policy professor Dr. Adan Saleh believes that, “We are losing a great chance by consuming ourselves in this haram-halal debate. While other countries are progressing by employing this innovative technology, we are again left with mere issues. There is nothing religiously ‘unacceptable’ in my opinion. It is simple science and nothing else.”

However, there are others who differ in opinion, such as agricultural researcher Adeeba Khairun, who has spent the last few years researching on GMO and feels that “there are some aspects to GMO that require more research, only after which it can be deemed appropriate or inappropriate.” Several Islamic countries have sufficient resources and expertise, that can enable them to lead the scene in this field and set the ground.

If we look at the different concerns around GMOs, are they really valid? To date, there does not seem to be any substantial evidence of GMO crops that caused weed growth, as cross-pollination rates are very low. Similarly, there is no evidence of a large-scale increase in pesticide resistance in insects or antibiotic resistance due to GMOs. GMOs have been used in USA since two decades and none of the previous anti-GMO claims has been recorded.

One ironic question arises here, is that while the Muslim countries might not be indigenously producing any GMO’s, yet are they still not consuming such products through imports? GMOs exist in more than 80% of food packaged in USA and whats more is, that USA and Canada have no restrictions on labeling GM food . When we are consuming GMOs already, then why not produce it internally as well? This will enable the Muslim countries to not only become self-sufficient and rely less on imports but, also set their own rules and regulations so as to ensure that GMOs will be appropriate to consume.

One Major risk of using GMOs seeds is the monopoly of large companies, but this can be regulated through tough monitoring and fair legislation, which ensure rights of small farmers as well as big companies.

The way forward

GMOs is not the only way to achieve food security but, it is one option that should be explored carefully. In a world of increasing hunger facing drastic climate changes, once cannot afford to ignore GMOs as a possible option for improving food security. Moreover, if the Muslim countries come together in developing this field within the Muslim regions, then it can not only aid food security but, also work towards the unison of the Muslim world.

The Author is an Associate professor of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology, Head of center for scientific excellence “Helwan Structural Biology Research” (HSBR) and Co-chair of the Global Young Academy (GYA), Helwan University, Egypt.

References:

http://www.un.org/millenniumgoals/

http://www.uncsd2012.org/index.php?page=view&type=400&nr=227&menu=45

http://www.isaaa.org/resources/publications/briefs/43/executivesummary/

http://healthresearchfunding.org/pros-cons-genetically-modified-foods/

Divides in Muslim World

The World Summit on Food Security (1996), defines food security as “when all people at all times have access to sufficient, safe, nutritious food to maintain a healthy and active life”. The three pillars of food security are: affordability, availability and food quality and safety (or utilization). Unlike other commodities, food is a basic human right, besides education and freedom (UDHR Article 25(1)). More than 800 million people throughout the world, do not have enough food to meet their basic nutritional needs. Some of these countries are Muslim countries such as Sudan, Ethiopia, Bangladesh and Yemen. However, some Muslim countries, particularly oil rich countries, score good marks in terms of food security, such as, United Arab Emirates, Saudi Arabia and Kuwait (with an average of 71) (EUI, 2014). A non-oil based economy that is able to reach a relatively high score, is Malaysia (68). The highest score is achieved by the US (89.3) and the lowest is Congo (24.8). The lowest among Muslim countries is Sudan (32.7). (Figure 1)

Figure 1: The Food Security Score of Selected Muslim Countries and Regions, 2014
Source: The Economist Intelligence Unit (2014).

Structurally, there is a clear divide among the Muslim countries, that is, the oil rich economies and the non-oil based economies. The rich oil countries, are characterised by oil-centric economies, with heavy dependence on food imports. With large surpluses in government coffers, these countries are comfortable in “affordability”, which allows them the “availability”, as well “quality and safe” food advantages. In short, these countries are fiscally sound to reap the benefits of food security through import. Due to the numerous conflicts that exist in the Middle East regions, there are oil rich countries that are experiencing fiscal strain, such as Syria, Iraq and Iran. Among the non-oil based economies, the countries that are seriously challenged in terms of their food security situation are, West Bank and Gaza, Sudan and Bangladesh. Clearly, economic wealth is highly correlated with food security.

However, high income breeds “excessive” lifestyle. It may have some bearings on “obesity”. Selected Muslim countries hold world’s high records of obesity. As shown in Figure 2, highest prevalence of obesity are observed in selected Arabic Muslim countries such as Kuwait (43%), Saudi Arabia (35%), Egypt (35%), Jordan (34%), UAE (34%) and Syria (32%). Hence, despite having a comfortable food security status, obesity prevalence may cause “food insecurity” to these countries, due to poor diet and lifestyle. The lowest prevalence of obesity, is observed in food insecure countries, such as Bangladesh, Ethiopia, Nepal, Vietnam, India, Cambodia, Niger and Chad (with an average of 2.5%).

Figure 2: Prevalence of Obesity in Selected Countries (%), 2014 Source: The Economist Intelligence Unit (2014).

The countries that are plagued with food insecurity, are normally poor in resources, slow growth and stuck with political conflicts and instability, such as West Bank and Gaza, Sudan and Yemen. While financial richness may hold the key to food security, its sustainability lies on the ability of the world, to supply a stable supply of food, which as shown in 2008, may not be so in the years to come.

Changing Dynamics

The dynamics of food security have changed. The landmark was made in 2008, when the world saw an unprecedented increase in food prices, causing food insecurity among the poor worldwide. The crisis ignited political upheaval and social unrest in some Muslim countries, such as Egypt, Ethiopia, Indonesia, Somalia and Yemen. Shocks are not new in the food market, but what separates the 2008 from the earlier ones, are the dynamics of it. Figure 3 indicates the continuous prevalence of shocks over time in the case of rice (1960M01-72014M04).

Note: signifies “price crisis” Figure 3: The Monthly Price of Rice, Jan. 1960 – July 2014 (USD/tonne) Source: International Monetary Fund (2014).

Figure 4: Selected Commodity Prices (Jan. 1980 – July 2014) (USD/tonne) Source: IMF (2014).

Consumers worldwide have enjoyed low agricultural and food prices, in the last three decades or so, until 2008. The crisis exhibits a number of pertinent behaviours. The price trends of the major commodities such as crude oil, vegetable oils (represented by palm and soy bean oils) and cereals (rice, maize, wheat and corn), have all experienced a dramatic increase in the beginning of 2006, reaching its peak in July 2008 (Figure 4). The commodity prices are found to move in tandem with each other, as well as crude oil prices. The correlation between the commodities and crude oil prices has increased after 2007 (Figure 5). Note also the growing volatility during the crisis and beyond.

Figure 5: Correlations between Commodity and Crude Oil Prices, Before and After 2007

Like any other price crisis, the fundamentals are the usual explanants of the situation. The demand was chasing the supply, which was constrained by factors such as weather problems, besides other supply determinants, such as low stock. On the demand side, globalization has brought about growth to the world’s populous countries (China and India) and other developing countries, which increased demand for food; particularly high-end products, such as meat and dairy products.

This crisis was unique in the sense, that it revealed a number of systemic factors as well as the emergence of new elements in the market. The systemic factors include: (i) The Green Revolution. which was introduced in the 1960s, has expired in that, its chemical-based input technology was damaging the soil and water, which affected efficiency and productivity. (ii) Despite a good start with Green Revolution, most developing countries have not invested enough in R&D, to improve variety as well as production technology. Investment in agriculture remains low and slow. This is proven by the fact, that the exportable surplus of rice remains very thin at 7% of the domestic production, due to low productivity.

The new elements were: (i) The emergence of demand for biofuel, which resulted in demand for agricultural feedstocks, such as crude palm oil (for bio-diesel) and corn and sugar cane (for bioethanol). All these crops are land intensive. Hence, food production is now competing with feedstock for land and water, creating “food-fuel” dilemma for resources. (ii) The commodity speculation activities in the west, has aggravated the price swings in the world market.

Way Forward: Food First

The Muslim world should not be complacent with hedging on oil, to “buy” food security. The future of world food supply, is challenged on many fronts particularly, climate change and resource depletion, while the world population and hence, demand for food, continues to increase. Rationalizations are needed to improve the food security situation in all countries, oil rich or poor countries alike. There is dire need to intensify R&D, as well as investment in agriculture, to increase production in a sustainable manner. Studies have shown that R&D in agriculture, gives the highest return to agricultural production, followed by education and roads and other amenities. In terms of poverty eradication, education yields highest return followed by R&D and infrastructural development (Table 1). Without doubt, the future of food security lies largely on R&D and innovations, particularly in producing varieties that are resistant to climate change, sustainable farming practices, post-harvest technology and preservation of resources and environment. In short, a “greener” Green Revolution is imperative for the sustainability of food in the future.

Table 1: Ranking of Return of Public Expenditure on Agricultural Production and Poverty Eradication

Fatimah Mohamed Arshad is Director, Institute of Agricultural and Food Policy Studies, Universiti Putra Malaysia.

References

1. The human right to adequate food and freedom from hunger

http://www.fao.org/docrep/w9990e/w9990e03.htm

2. Global food security index 2014: An Annual Measure of the state of global food security

http://foodsecurityindex.eiu.com/Resources

3. Fan, Shenggen (2007). Investment Priorities for Hunger and Poverty, paper presented in a seminar titled “Agricultural and Rural Development for Reducing Poverty and Hunger in Asia: In Pursuit of Inclusive and Sustainable Growth”, organised by IFPRI and ADB, Manila, August 9-11.

4. International Monetary Fund (2014). Commodity Prices

http://www.imf.org

5. The Universal Declaration of Human Rights

www.un.org/en/documents/udhr/

6. World Summit on Food Security

http://www.fao.org/wsfs/world-summit/en/?no_cache=1

It may look harmless – pretty even – but in the wheat belt that stretches from Morocco to Turkey, it’s a sign of ruined crops and dashed hopes. It’s known as yellow rust, but to farmers in the Muslim world, its presence means just one thing: hunger.

Food for All

According to the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO), food security “exists when all people, at all times, have physical and economic access to sufficient, safe and nutritious food to meet their dietary needs … for an active and healthy life.” Sadly, such conditions are becoming increasingly rare.

This year, the population of our planet reached seven billion – and it’s still rising. As our resources are stretched to their limit, many nations are already going hungry. The United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization estimated, that nearly 870 million – that’s one in eight people worldwide – were chronically undernourished in 2010-2012.

This situation is expected to be exacerbated by droughts, floods, storms, rising sea levels, and failing crops: the real world effects of what many people still consider to be ‘hypothetical’ climate change.

While it’s known that in some instances, the Greenhouse Gases that cause climate change can encourage crops to grow faster using less water (a process called carbon dioxide fertilization), the long-term prognosis for world food security is poor. In some wheat-growing regions, production is projected to decline by as much as 47 percent as these new, extreme climatic conditions hit home. Nations such as Algeria, Morocco, Pakistan and the Sudan, are among a dozen identified as being most at risk.

Wheat Rust

Wheat is the most important food crop in the world, after rice. Every year, wheat feeds about 2.5 billion people in 90 developing nations. When it comes to food security, though, the world is currently in a state of red alert and much of that alert is focused on wheat crops.

In addition to the threats posed by climate change, crop disease is a significant constraint on food production, and wheat rust is one of the most aggressive diseases to blight agriculture in North Africa, the Middle East and Asia.

Wheat rust (Puccinia striiformis f.sp. tritici), is a parasitic fungus, that kills or stunts bread and durum wheat crops. There are three basic types: stem (black) rust, leaf (brown) rust and yellow (stripe) rust, which leaves characteristic yellow spore lines along the plant’s leaf. The fungus has been known and feared, since human records began. In fact the Romans called it ‘numen’, meaning divine power – and no wonder .

Historically, wheat rust was believed to be a problem that mainly affected crops in cooler, Northern climates, but it’s an adaptable and tenacious beast. It loves the sort of humid conditions that climate change brings and outbreaks, such as the one that devastated crops in Ethiopia in 2010, have shown that new strains of the fungus are perfectly at home, even in equatorial climates. So, in addition to regions like North America, today’s wheat rust hot spots also include Algeria, Egypt, Lebanon, Iran, Syria, and Yemen. Further more, plant pathology experts at the International Wheat Stripe Rust Symposium, have reported, that under the right conditions, a rust infection could be carried by the wind from one crop to another, in just 24 hours.

Combining Forces

Given the adaptability and wide geographical spread of the wheat rust fungus, a global pandemic isn’t merely possible; it’s probable.

In any given year, farmers worldwide can expect to lose around two percent of their crop to wheat rust. Yet, when the right conditions occur, as they did in Pakistan in 1977-1978, losses rose to 30 percent in the Punjab.   In 2010, the disease inflicted up to 80 percent losses across the Middle East, where wheat provides 40 percent of an average daily calorie intake. In 2013 it struck again, affecting 40 percent of the crops in Morocco. It’s easy to imagine the human cost behind such startling statistics. Fortunately all is not gloom and doom.

Back in the 1970s, the problem faced by farmers in Pakistan was, that they didn’t have any resistant seed – varieties of wheat that had been bred to withstand rust attack. Small landholders had been reluctant to invest in the expensive new seeds, when they’d been getting good crop yields, from tried and tested wheat stocks for decades.

The government stepped in, importing resistant seed stocks from both Mexico and India. They also established an Agricultural Research Council, to coordinate research efforts and share their experiences with their neighbours.

Saved by Science?

There’s no doubt, that science is a crucial ally in the battle against wheat rust, whether it’s fungicides to fight the rust when it attacks, or new, resistant seed stocks to stop the fungus in its tracks. Emergency disease control plans, need to be drawn up to cover all crucial crops and – vitally – countries need to educate and encourage new generations of agricultural specialists, plant pathologists and agronomists.

At the forefront of the fight, are organizations such as the International Center for Agricultural Research in the Dry Areas (ICARDA), whose work on yellow rust started in 1977. Their ‘Stripe Rust Network’ now stretches from the highlands of Ethiopia, to the shores of the Mediterranean Sea. The Network has already done invaluable work identifying dominant rust strains, developing and deploying resistant seed varieties, establishing physical spore traps and monitoring and sharing information throughout the Network.

Speaking during the 2nd International Wheat Stripe Rust Symposium, Dr. Mahmoud Solh, Director General of ICARDA, reinforced the message, however, that science is no lone saviour. As Pakistan discovered during its own rust crisis in the 1970s,  international co-operation is vital when dealing with an enemy that has no respect for international borders. “We have to focus on partnership and networking, strengthening science and policy dialogue between researchers and national governments, to control stripe rust at both the regional and global level,” he said.

The father of the Green Revolution and Nobel Laureate Dr Norman Borlaug, commented in his seminal article for the New York Times that, “Rust Never Sleeps” . It’s an ever mutating disease and while those in the poorer, developing world may well bear the brunt of future outbreaks, the problem of safeguarding food security is a global one which must be shared by all of mankind.

Paula Hammond is a professional author of over 35 non-fiction books, including popular science volumes on fossils, dinosaurs and endangered animals. She has a passion for learning and the wonders of the natural world

References:

1. World Food Summit Plan of Action, “Rome Declaration on World Food Security”, Nov. 1996. http://www.fao.org/docrep/003/w3613e/w3613e00.htm

2. World Population Clock see: http://www.worldometers.info/world-population/

3. FAO Report, “The State of Food Security in the World”, Rome 2012. http://www.fao.org/docrep/016/i3027e/i3027e00.htm

4. World Bank Report April 2008, “Adaptation and Development”. http://siteresources.worldbank.org/EXTCC/Resources/BaliBreakfast13april.pdf

5. FAO study quoted by the World Watch Institute. http://www.worldwatch.org/node/6271

6. World Bank Report April 2008, “Adaptation and Development”. http://siteresources.worldbank.org/EXTCC/Resources/BaliBreakfast13april.pdf

7. ICARDA. http://www.icarda.org/striperust2014/challenges/

8. International Food Policy Research Institute, Nov. 2009, “Combating Stem and Leaf Rust of Wheat”. http://www.ifpri.org/sites/default/files/publications/ifpridp00910.pdf

9. Dr. Mahmoud Solh, Director General of ICARDIA. See: http://www.icarda.org/blog-content/%5Bnode%3ABlog%20type%5Dqa-dr-mahmoud-solh-mobilizing-international-efforts-defeat-stripe-rust

10. http://www.icarda.org/blog-content/%5Bnode%3ABlog%20type%5Dqa-dr-mahmoud-solh-mobilizing-international-efforts-defeat-stripe-rust

11. New York Times, “Stem Rust Never Sleeps”, 26th April 2008. http://www.nytimes.com/2008/04/26/opinion/26borlaug.html?_r=0

According to WHO, food security is “when all people at all times have access to sufficient, safe, nutritious food to maintain a healthy and active life”. Food security is increasingly becoming an area of global concern. localhost/muslim intends to bring the status and issues of food security to the forefront, through its current issue.

This time around, we bring you an appealing infographic, that highlights the food security concerns in the Muslim world, and looks at how the Muslim countries are faring the world over, in this area of global concern:

Click on the infographic for a larger view.

Sources:

FAO

The Economist Intelligence Unit

World Bank