A debate over the importation and cultivation of genetically modified (GMO) soyabeans is pitching livestock and poultry industries against local agricultural processors and environmental advocates.
Soyabean is a critical component for animal feed. Proponents of imports paint a grim picture for Nigeria’s agricultural processing sector, arguing that spiraling costs of soybeans and maize have crippled the poultry, dairy, and aquaculture industries, ultimately leading to soaring food inflation.
They contend that the unavailability of key feed ingredients threatens jobs and the very survival of these crucial sectors. Furthermore, advocates for GMO maize and soybeans assert their products are not only more cost-effective but also nutritionally superior, accusing current restrictions of unfairly protecting a select few local processors at the expense of the wider poultry industry and consumers.
According to a United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) report, Nigeria produced 1.1 million metric tonnes of soybeans in 2022, solidifying its position as the second-largest producer in Africa after South Africa.
Despite this domestic output, Nigeria’s current soyabean consumption is estimated at a higher 1.275 million tonnes, highlighting a clear deficit.
A Senior Lecturer, Ruminant Nutrition and Management,the Department of Animal Science, Faculty of Agriculture, Ahmadu Bello University, Zaria, Dr. Taofik A. Ibrahim supports the importation of GMO soybeans. He believes it is a necessary measure to address the regular shortfall experienced by livestock and poultry producers.
Fodder production consultant, Kola Kuku, offers partial support for the imports, acknowledging the critical shortage of inputs for livestock feeds.
Read Also: Art exhibition on Pakistan-Nigeria cultural ties opens in Abuja
“The reason is that there is a massive shortage of inputs for livestock feeds. Nigeria is in deficit for maize and soybean, the very inputs for livestock feeds.
There is also food inflation and serious hunger in the nation,” Kuku stated. However, he cautioned, “On the other side is the fact that no one has been able to publish the long-term effects of the consumption of GMO materials on humans and livestock. I will expect a cautious approach to this, to the effect that the import will only be for livestock feed and would not leak into the food markets for human consumption. If this can be assured, I think importation should only be limited to feed millers that would use the GMO inputs for livestock feeds.
The various Business Membership Organisations such as the Poultry Association of Nigeria [PAN] should be saddled with the responsibility and the Federal Ministry of Livestock Development, Federal Ministry of Agriculture should supervise the distribution.”
Livestock expert Adeola Adeolu, however, disagreed, questioning the entire premise of the campaign for GMO soybean imports. “Palliatives won’t get us nowhere. What is increasing the cost of feed? Why should importation be an option whether GMO or otherwise? Until root causes are addressed we ain’t going to where,” Adeolu asserted, demanding a deeper examination of the underlying issues driving feed costs.
Anyanwu Bede echoed this sentiment, arguing, “That won’t be the solution, as that product- (GMO soybean) can be sourced locally. Importation will even increase the cost the more considering the logistics implications involved in shipping, clearing and trucking.”
Muhammed Alibaba also voiced strong opposition to the importation of GMO soybeans. “Why must the imported soybeans be of the GMO varieties?” he questioned, further highlighting that “Soybeans is already being imported into the country by some of the processors that can afford to. However, imports must not be incentivized as they did for Rice and Maize, at the expense of local production! Prices of locally produced varieties have been depressed, leaving farmers in a quandary!”
Farmer associations and local soyabean processors are collectively advocating for policies that prioritise and protect domestic production.