Three decades have passed since genetically modified (GM) crops began to be commercially cultivated. The outcome is a list of broken promises and a trail of contamination affecting soil, water, and air through glyphosate and other agrochemicals. These substances have permeated the bodies of farmers, nearby communities, and millions of consumers, leaving chemical residues in blood, urine, and breast milk, according to the Atlas of Transgenic Agribusiness in the Southern Cone(available in Spanish).
Transnational corporations promised higher yields and reduced agrochemical use. They also claimed nutritional improvements, such as “golden rice” enriched with vitamin A, alongside other supposed benefits. None of these promises materialized.
Today, four corporations dominate the global GMO market: Bayer (owner of Monsanto), Corteva (formed through the merger of DuPont-Pioneer and Dow), Syngenta (owned by Sinochem Holding), and BASF. Together, they also control half of the global commercial seed market and two-thirds of the agrochemical market.
Through industry front groups used to conceal their interests, such as ChileBio, ArgenBio, and AgroBio México, these corporations promote the impression that GMOs are widespread worldwide. Their own data, however, tell a different story: GM crops occupy less than 13% of the world’s arable land, and just 10 countries account for 98% of that area. Three countries alone — the United States, Argentina, and Brazil — represent 80% of global cultivation. They are followed by Canada, India, Paraguay, China, South Africa, Pakistan, and Bolivia.
The United States was the first country to cultivate glyphosate-tolerant GM soybeans, followed by Argentina in 1996. While 32 countries currently approve the commercial planting of one or more GM crops, only around ten have significant cultivated areas. In contrast, more than 150 countries do not allow GM crop cultivation, and 38 have restrictions or bans on one or more GM crops, including Mexico, Ecuador, Peru, Belize, and Venezuela.
Just four crops account for nearly all GM cultivation, all of them global commodities: soy, corn, cotton, and canola. GMOs were once promoted as a solution to world hunger, yet they have not been directed toward human consumption. Instead, most are used for animal feed in industrial systems, with approximately one-third destined for biofuels and other industrial uses.
In summary: four transnational corporations control all GMO crops; ten countries account for 98% of cultivated area; four crops occupy 99.4% of that land (soy, corn, cotton, and canola); and only two types of GMOs are widely used — over 90% are herbicide-tolerant, while the remainder are so-called ‘insecticidal’ varieties using Bt toxin, often stacked with additional traits for herbicide tolerance.
Has agrochemical use decreased? On the contrary, they have risen exponentially. Because GM crops are engineered to tolerate glyphosate, the use of this herbicide — classified as carcinogenic by the World Health Organization — has increased more than twentyfold. This has led to the emergence of dozens of “superweeds” resistant to glyphosate. In response, higher doses and concentrations have been applied, while corporations began selling new stacked GM varieties tolerant to multiple agrochemicals such as glufosinate, dicamba, and 2,4-D — all increasingly hazardous.
Have yields improved? Evidence shows they have not. Long-term studies indicate that GM crops perform similarly to, or worse than, hybrid varieties. Research by the Union of Concerned Scientists in the United States found that over 13 years, GM crops increased yields by just 0.2% annually, while improvements in conventional and agroecological farming boosted yields by more than 10% during the same period. Bt corn initially appeared more productive, but was gradually withdrawn as pests developed resistance, further driving increased agrochemical use. Subsequent studies have confirmed these trends.
All GM seeds are patented and can cost up to 30% more. Corporations have also profited from thousands of lawsuits against farmers accused of “using” patented genes when their fields were contaminated through cross-pollination.
GMOs have proven disastrous for health, food systems, and the environment — while generating substantial profits for transnational corporations. In many countries, battles with broad popular support have been and continue to be waged to pressure for bans on their cultivation and consumption. Worldwide, when asked, the overwhelming majority of people say they would rather not consume GMOs.
To sustain this business model and continue misleading producers and consumers, corporations have adopted a new strategy: rebranding genetically modified crops as “gene-edited.” This shift allows them to circumvent biosafety and labeling regulations in several countries — a process now advancing in Mexico as well. Resistance continues, and we will not let this happen.
Silvia Ribeiro is an environmental researcher and activist from Uruguay, based in Mexico. She is a member of the ETC Group (Action Group on Erosion, Technology and Concentration). This text was originally published in La Jornada.
