Farmers and civil society organizations around the world are outraged by the recent discovery of further connections between the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation and agribusiness titan Monsanto. Last week, a financial website published the Gates Foundation’s investment portfolio, including 500,000 shares of Monsanto stock with an estimated worth of $23.1 million purchased in the second quarter of 2010. This marks a substantial increase from its previous holdings, valued at just over $360,000.
“The Foundation’s direct investment in Monsanto is problematic on two primary levels,” said Dr. Phil Bereano, University of Washington Professor Emeritus and recognized expert on genetic engineering, in the press release. “First, Monsanto has a history of blatant disregard for the interests and well-being of small farmers around the world, as well as an appalling environmental track record. The strong connections to Monsanto cast serious doubt on the Foundation’s heavy funding of agricultural development in Africa and purported goal of alleviating poverty and hunger among small-scale farmers. Second, this investment represents an enormous conflict of interests.”
Monsanto has already negatively impacted agriculture in African countries. For example, in South Africa in 2009, Monsanto’s genetically modified maize failed to produce kernels and hundreds of farmers were devastated. According to Mariam Mayet, environmental attorney and director of the Africa Centre for Biosafety in Johannesburg, some farmers suffered up to an 80% crop failure. While Monsanto compensated the large-scale farmers to whom it directly sold the faulty product, it gave nothing to the small-scale farmers to whom it had handed out free sachets of seeds. “When the economic power of Gates is coupled with the irresponsibility of Monsanto, the outlook for African smallholders is not very promising,” said Mayet. Monsanto’s aggressive patenting practices have also monopolized control over seed in ways that deny farmers control over their own harvest, going so far as to sue—and bankrupt—farmers for “patent infringement.”
News of the Foundation’s recent Monsanto investment has confirmed the misgivings of many farmers and sustainable agriculture advocates in Africa, among them the Kenya Biodiversity Coalition, who commented, “We have long suspected that the founders of AGRA—the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation—had a long and more intimate affair with Monsanto.” Indeed, according to Travis English, researcher with AGRA Watch, “The Foundation’s ownership of Monsanto stock is emblematic of a deeper, more long-standing involvement with the corporation, particularly in Africa.” In 2008, AGRA Watch, a project of the Seattle-based organization Community Alliance for Global Justice, uncovered many linkages between the Foundation’s grantees and Monsanto. For example, some grantees (in particular about 70% of grantees in Kenya) of the Alliance for a Green Revolution in Africa (AGRA)—considered by the Foundation to be its “African face”—work directly with Monsanto on agricultural development projects. Other prominent links include high-level Foundation staff members who were once senior officials for Monsanto, such as Rob Horsch, formerly Monsanto Vice President of International Development Partnerships and current Senior Program Officer of the Gates Agricultural Development Program.
Transnational corporations like Monsanto have been key collaborators with the Foundation and AGRA’s grantees in promoting the spread of industrial agriculture on the continent. This model of production relies on expensive inputs such as chemical fertilizers, genetically modified seeds, and herbicides. Though this package represents enticing market development opportunities for the private sector, many civil society organizations contend it will lead to further displacement of farmers from the land, an actual increase in hunger, and migration to already swollen cities unable to provide employment opportunities. In the words of a representative from the Kenya Biodiversity Coalition, “AGRA is poison for our farming systems and livelihoods. Under the philanthropic banner of greening agriculture, AGRA will eventually eat away what little is left of sustainable small-scale farming in Africa.”
A 2008 report initiated by the World Bank and the UN, the International Assessment of Agricultural Knowledge, Science and Technology for Development (IAASTD), promotes alternative solutions to the problems of hunger and poverty that emphasize their social and economic roots. The IAASTD concluded that small-scale agroecological farming is more suitable for the third world than the industrial agricultural model favored by Gates and Monsanto. In a summary of the key findings of IAASTD, the Pesticide Action Network North America (PANNA) emphasizes the report’s warning that “continued reliance on simplistic technological fixes—including transgenic crops—will not reduce persistent hunger and poverty and could exacerbate environmental problems and worsen social inequity.” Furthermore, PANNA explains, “The Assessment’s 21 key findings suggest that small-scale agroecological farming may offer one of the best means to feed the hungry while protecting the planet.”
The Gates Foundation has been challenged in the past for its questionable investments; in 2007, the L.A. Times exposed the Foundation for investing in its own grantees and for its “holdings in many companies that have failed tests of social responsibility because of environmental lapses, employment discrimination, disregard for worker rights, or unethical practices.” The Times chastised the Foundation for what it called “blind-eye investing,” with at least 41% of its assets invested in “companies that countered the foundation’s charitable goals or socially-concerned philosophy.”
Although the Foundation announced it would reassess its practices, it decided to retain them. As reported by the L.A. Times, chief executive of the Foundation Patty Stonesifer defended their investments, stating, “It would be naïve…to think that changing the foundation’s investment policy could stop the human suffering blamed on the practices of companies in which it invests billions of dollars.” This decision is in direct contradiction to the Foundation’s official “Investment Philosophy”, which, according to its website, “defined areas in which the endowment will not invest, such as companies whose profit model is centrally tied to corporate activity that [Bill and Melinda] find egregious. This is why the endowment does not invest in tobacco stocks.”
More recently, the Foundation has come under fire in its own hometown. This week, 250 Seattle residents sent postcards expressing their concern that the Foundation’s approach to agricultural development, rather than reducing hunger as pledged, would instead “increase farmer debt, enrich agribusiness corporations like Monsanto and Syngenta, degrade the environment, and dispossess small farmers.” In addition to demanding that the Foundation instead fund “socially and ecologically appropriate practices determined locally by African farmers and scientists” and support African food sovereignty, they urged the Foundation to cut all ties to Monsanto and the biotechnology industry.
AGRA Watch, a program of Seattle-based Community Alliance for Global Justice, supports African initiatives and programs that foster farmers’ self-determination and food sovereignty. AGRA Watch also supports public engagement in fighting genetic engineering and exploitative agricultural policies, and demands transparency and accountability on the part of the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation and AGRA.
Source: AGRA Watch
[Thanks to MacDailyNews Reader “ChrissyOne” for the heads up.]
@Chrissy,
For a person who is fixated on Sarah Palin, you certainly must have political people you admire. Are you afraid to name them? Or are you just completely clueless? My bet is you think you know everything, but actually just get your political knowledge from Saturday Night Live and Jon Stewart. That means you don’t really have political knowledge but you say things to be cool. That explains why you voted for the “fashionable” candidate, Obama, though he had zero qualifications, except an ideology that aims to destroy our system of government. I suggest you stop whining about Sarah Palin, and spend some time thinking about what constitutes a good leader. Now that you have concluded that Obama, who you voted for, is not desirable, you should think about why you did not take time to learn about him before you voted. The information is public. And then you should find some politicians who you do admire and you should be able to explain who they are and why you admire them. What core principles motivate you. This requires some actual thought, reading etc. More work than just taking shots at Sarah Palin. But it would be good for you.
As for you Buster, how did you get a name that so perfectly captures your intelligence?
@buster
Are you telling me that our wonderful future rest on your hopes for a responsible government to manage all of this wondrous technology? Have you lost your mind? Why would I trust anything you say about anything at all?
As for “resistance management” or a scientific point of view, the hubris involved in large scale application of the technologies in question (genetic manipulation) is profoundly disturbing. Believe it or not, I love technology. Precautionary principal abuse is, for me, actually a good example of the overextension or overuse of the tools that guide humanities rational. That being said, I can never understand why people like yourself tend to forget that large scale, organized behavior, under pressure of compressed timescales, based on a sense of urgency (If we don’t act, we’ll die!) often has led humanity to monstrous results time and time again, but they always meant well!
We are not running out of food. That is just a lie. “Distribution management” euphemisms aside, perhaps we should find ways for people smarter than you to run things for awhile?
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/africa/un-food-aid-causing-chaos-and-violence-in-somalia-454175.html
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/02/04/world/africa/04iht-mideast.4.19933553.html
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/africa/8084477.stm
http://www.turkishweekly.net/news/106507/somali-militants-seize-and-burn-aid-food.html
I’ll stop there, but could put THOUSANDS of links to prove my point. Could you give me ONE link to a longitudinal, multigenerational study of the effects on humans of the use food products containing genetic material that has been manipulated in a way that does not occur under natural conditions? Please? Pretty please? With a cherry on top??
“Many scientific people (those working in this industry) value an objective opinion highly and are not easily biased, even by companies that they have worked at for many years. I’m not saying there is no corruption. There obviously is. But, put a little more faith in these people in general. I’m one of them.”
You are one of them..EXACTLY the reason you cannot be impartial. How can you purport to me that “Scientific People” are highly objective and not easily biased? Nope, not gonna work. Humans are humans regardless of profession. We are all capable and guilty of bias and are quite fallible. C1 is correct, it is a huge conflict of interest and yet another shining example of cronyism and corruption in government. Elliot Spitzer was a poster boy for upstanding citizen and then we found out, he wasn’t..Don’t be naive.
Furthermore:
http://preventdisease.com/news/10/082710_public_protests_GMO.shtml
@Truth
Thank you for explaining the need to be skeptical of the scientists who claim to have a consensus and who don’t accept any debate about their data, their conclusions, or alternate theories. You make great case about why the scientists behind global warming theory, paid for with government grants earned by commitment to “orthodoxy”, are not to be considered authorities. It is totally proper to be skeptical of those who depend on government funding and who must produce certain conclusions to get that funding. Critical thinking is invaluable here. Thanks for the post.
@ kent
Sorry cheickpea, I’m not your monkey. Since you profess to find Sarah Palin to be a heroic political figure, then you’ve lost any credibility in any book I’d ever keep. Instead of arguing with you I thought I’d do something more productive and more likely to get demonstrable results, so I’ve been yelling at a pile of grapefruits for the last hour. We’re beginning to make progress. Now if you’ll excuse me, I think my cat has some sold ideas for a flat tax proposal.
Bill Gates is the Devil.
I do encourage you to keep posting, Kent. Much the same way that Buster supports Palin, I’m fully behind every paragraph you type. Every word just makes me look better.
Meanwhile, back at the ranch…
http://desertpeace.wordpress.com/2010/08/27/israel-turns-the-clock-back-two-thousand-years-2/
ChrissyOne asked me to post this message with the list of political figures she admires, and other related statements. She is doing her nails and is having a bad hair day.
Chrissy Likes
1. FIdel Castro – man of the people
2. Che Guevarra – pacifist, and man of the people
3. Ted Kazinski – a man who lived his environmental principles
4. Margaret Sanger – pioneer of eugenics with the goal of reducing the number of “undesirable” people. She founded Planned Parenthood.
5. Hugh Hefner and Larry Flynt – defending women’s rights to self-expression
6. Barney Frank – standing up for free enterprise in the sex industry
7. Nancy Pelosi – inventor of the 20,000 law. Pioneered the concept that voters should have the right to read the bill after it is passed.
8. Al Gore – inventor of the internet and the 11PM backrub.
Chrissy’s political philosophy can best be described as Palinology. She believes that intense scrutiny and discussion of Sarah Palin will lead to a better world.
and another thing:
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/38877692/ns/travel-news/
@doc
You seem to have a pretty cynical view of the world. Are you saying that we should not explore recombinant gene technology. That there is zero benefit for mankind.
And you may want to consider to stop posting those links…they are tangental to the discussion of transgenics and serve simply serve to make you look as dense as the articles.
@Kent…perhaps you are partially right about Margaret Sanger. If there was a vote on here about drowning you as a baby to remove you from the gene pool, I suspect your chances would not be very high….no offence.
Do you get recurring fantasies about Sara and you naked in the bush with her holding your rifle??? Tell me, is your rifle loaded or not?
Buster
Before you venture into things like recombinant genes, learn how to spell. Now, go back to your Internet porn.
@buster
Explore? Where is that study link I ask for? Show me this “explore” you speak of.
As for my links and relevance, the “msnbc/travel” link is a perfect example of a sense of urgency based on false information due to ONE mistake in an otherwise exemplary performance, my “desert “peace/two thousand years” link is a very good example of a governmental body at work, the “prevent disease/GMO” link speaks for it self, and the four links in my previous response to you all relate to “food distribution management” problems, but you would know all of that if you had bothered to look. Except for that, perhaps you are right and I should have posted the following instead:
http://www.theepochtimes.com/n2/content/view/41604/
http://weeklystandard.com/blogs/epa-reviewing-request-ban-led-bullets
http://www.watoday.com.au/wa-news/flu-vaccination-ban-goes-national-after-fever-convulsions-in-children-20100423-tglp.html?from=age_ft
http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=CNG.74f06613ea91a1f1041b96c96477427f.561&show_article=1
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/foodanddrink/foodanddrinknews/7967193/Berlin-cannibal-restaurant-calls-for-diners-to-donate-body-parts-for-menu.html
@Kent…if I mistype words, I blame my failing eyes. I am learning to live with it….and so do most tolerant people I know.
And if you want some advice…don’t match wits with C1. Forget about her intelligence, she could crush you with her wit alone. In fact, she has, you are just to dense to know it yet. My only fear is that she grows tired of you and will stop…and none of us will get our smile of the day.
@doc….I am a scientist. I would never link to the unsubstantiated crap opinion pieces that you use. Get real. In fact, use the national enquirer, they are probably more fact based that the stuff you show.
I particularly liked the one where this guy Chopra says…and you can read on page 154 of my book…
nuff said.
GO back to area 54….your mom is waiting in the car.
http://electrogravity.com/DualFreqEG/S_4UFO.pdf
@The Dude- you forgot to abide…
It’s not my fault. I voted for Ron Paul…
@buster
If you are a scientist, may I see your vita?
Opinion piece? Which of the links leads to an opinion piece?
Also, still waiting for a link, any link, to a longitudinal, multigenerational study of the effects on humans of the use of food products containing genetic material that has been manipulated in a way that does not occur under natural conditions?
If you cannot provide a link, perhaps a citation? Any study. Just one. ONE link to a longitudinal, multigenerational study of the effects on humans of the use of food products containing genetic material that has been manipulated in a way that does not occur under natural conditions? Please? Pretty please? With a cherry on top?
As for area 54, I don’t need any more tats…
http://www.area54tattoos.com/
Oh, I almost forgot. Without a vita, your claim to be a “scientist” is nothing more than unsubstantiated crap, kinda like an opinion piece. I prefer to get real. In fact, I may as well use the national enquirer, they are probably more fact based that the stuff you show.
Buster
Not afraid to match wits with anyone who admits voting for Obama, the least intelligent, laziest, completely unqualified doofus ever elected. And people whose time is consumed with Sarah Palin while the country is being systematically destroyed by Obama, Reid, Pelosi, Frank, etc., show their total lack of intelligence. How about noticing the entire private economy is almost destroyed by these morons and start attacking these people ins read of Sarah Palin who has no power over anybody.
Pretty pleazzz!!
http://www.zazzle.com/frankencherry+gifts
Occasionally in life we are handed a litmus test for stupidity.
Sarah Palin is one of those occasions.
” width=”19″ height=”19″ alt=”tongue wink” style=”border:0;” />
troll sez: “… consumed with Sarah Palin while the country is being systematically destroyed by Obama, Reid, Pelosi, Frank, etc., show their total lack of intelligence.”
Apparently trolls can’t see themselves in a mirror.
@doc
I have a doctorate from Canada and my postdoc at UCLA. But I don’t care if you believe me or not. Its not germaine to the subject at hand.
Multigenerational? Insecticidal plants haven’t been around that long. Also it is impossible to prove a negative hypothesis. If I tell you eating an apple a day for 50 years is bad. How would you go about proving that it is?
On the other hand, the toxin spray has been sprayed on our forests and our crops for over 30 years. Not one negative effect has been recorded (on human health)….unless it causes irresistible urges to vote for big chested folksy women who like to create new words. I dare you to refudiate that mister…….
@ buster
Scientist my ass. Prove a negative hypothesis? What the hell does that mean? Refudiate? Please! You are a 22 year old shill working for a PR firm hired by monsanto who should be ashamed of wasting so much money for such a poor education. Piss off.