At a press talk two weeks ago, the federal minister for Ministry of National Food Security & Research - flanked by top PTI leadership – declared his determination to bring about a revolution in crop yields. His plan? To press on with Pakistan’s perennial fixation with wheat and sugarcane – crops already produced in surplus - with a passing reference of rice, thrown in for a good measure.

That arresting falling cotton productivity does not feature in the priority list of PTI’s agriculture brains has been alluded to in this space frequently (for more, read ‘Whither cotton emergency?’, published on June 26, 2019). Now, a champion crop is set to suffer at the alter of federal minister’s quest to prove he is ‘seen to be in charge’; namely, maize.

It is no accident that maize is the only major crop to have recorded consistent five percent annual increase in yield over the last two decades. Despite poor agronomics – from increasing input prices; years of declining water availability interspersed with periods of flooding; distorted agriculture markets; crop failure and vulnerability to evolving pests – that led to a slowdown in productivity growth of other major crops such as cotton and wheat; maize has remained resilient.

In order to sustain the growth trajectory of farming’s ‘last-man-standing’, it is important to appreciate the drivers of its performance in recent past.

At the turn of the century, maize remained a distant fifth among major crops, grown chiefly in KP and northern Punjab regions. The local white maize variety – otherwise known as sweet corn - enjoyed popularity for human consumption and edible oil extraction. Yet, it also boasted one of the poorest yields in the world, averaging at 1.5 tons per hectare, with little commercial scope.

Corn’s push into the new millennium coincided with increasing meat prices – Pakistan’s primary source for protein – that helped encourage demographic shift towards poultry as the alternate, cheaper protein source. Increasing demand for maize, now used as poultry feed, created enabling conditions for high yield hybrid seed varieties. First introduced by international seed companies, these quickly gained popularity led by demand from domestic feed and silage market.

In the following years, maize cultivation made remarkable in-roads in central Punjab, as yield from international seed varieties kissed a peak of 8.1 tons per hectares in regions such as Sahiwal; close to world average. As total domestic maize output grew by over three times within 15 years, crop from Punjab’s warm central belt began to contribute nearly two-thirds of total domestic production.

The pivotal role played by imported hybrid seed variety is starkly obvious even today by regional yield gap. As KP farmers stayed put with local sweet corn variety, province’s yield averaged at 1.88 tons per hectare even in FY17 (later data unavailable). As a result, KP’s share in domestic production declined to a little under 15 percent, from over half (or 55 percent) as recent as in FY04. This, despite that KP’s climate is better suited to the imported hybrid seed germplasm, originally designed with USA’s temperate farming conditions in mind.

Maize’s dramatic gains become even more significant when considering its twin season status. The grain has not leaped frogged its output purely by eating away at acreage from competing crops. In fact, higher yield has been witnessed during rabi season throughout Punjab, ensuring that crucial cotton acres remain intact during kharif season.

While yield has maintained its positive trajectory, like most ratios, it increases at a decreasing rate in absence of enabling agronomy. At the same time, poultry sector has claimed doubled digit growth in recent years, buoyed by a growing population with increasing consumption of chicken as protein source.

Estimates place demand from poultry sector alone to surpass domestic maize production by 2023, using base case of fifty percent maize input in feed. To bridge this gap, Pakistan needs to quickly boost its output – which, unless receives another yield-led dramatic push – can only come at the cost of converting competing crop acres to corn/maize.

That push, it seemed, was set to come in the form of licensing of Bt. corn; a high yield genetically modified variety with average yield as high as 12 tons per hectare. Necessary legislation to this end was enacted in the form of Seed Act and later with Plant Breeder’s law, followed by several rounds of successful trial production.

Unfortunately, the federal government, in its infinite wisdom, pushed the brakes on commercial licencing of Bt. corn at the last moment. MNFS&R’s latest declaration that “biotechnology is welcome, but not in the form of GMOs”, means precious little when it has taken few meaningful steps to offer a suitable alternative to the problem.

If GMOs are shown to cause environmental degradation or pose risk to human health & safety, the government must not stop at instituting a mere ban on trial runs. It must also question the approvers and abettors of years of testing that went into Bt. trials at various government-run seed development and agri-research centres - who gave the technology a clean chit and hoped it would prove to be a breakthrough. It must also call to the stand solvent extractors who market cottonseed oil as edible, despite being obviously extracted from Bt. cotton crop.

Sadly, the latest development appears little more than political posturing aimed at mollifying the local seed lobby, which faces an existential crisis, but is regionalist in its mindset and makes little to no investment in seed related R&D. The real question, then, is not whether GMO is safe, but what will the repercussions be for local seed firms (numbering at over 550) if intellectual property laws were applied in earnest under the latest seed & plant breeder’s laws.

It is unfortunate that despite the bitter experience with Bt. cotton, the regulator has learned few lessons. Technologies that fill vacuum caused by latent demand make their way to willing buyers’ one way or another. Except, by banning Bt. corn without due process, government is missing a precious opportunity to regulate its commercialization. That way, it could hold biotech companies accountable for providing stewardship, constant testing for protection against crop failure and evolving pests and weed; while also attracting foreign investment in the process.

Instead, it is becoming increasing probable that attracted by higher yields and better returns, some less-than-scrupulous farmers may end up introducing Bt. corn into the country through grey channel – a replay of Bt. cotton experience from a decade before. Whether international seed companies will resist such an event or simply turn a blind eye is anybody’s guess. But rest assured, in absence of regularization, if a crop failure happens, they will walk scot-free. And another promising crop will bite the dust.

MNFS&R’s latest mantra on biotech is a clever bait for a soundbite hungry media. But, when it comes to policymaking concerning food security, using common sense is even nicer.