Should Pakistan cultivate GMO crops?

Pakistan’s agriculture stands at a critical crossroads. Climate change, water scarcity, shrinking landholdings, rising input costs and stagnant productivity are placing unprecedented pressure on the country’s food security. In response, hybrid, genetically modified (GMO) crops are increasingly promoted as a solution to improve yields, reduce pesticide use and enhance resistance to insects, diseases and drought. Yet consumers are paying the highest staples prices in the region, growers hue and cry for not getting the right prices for their crops due to increased inputs cost, exporters blame high priced agro commodities behind decline in agro food products despite increased productions size.

The issue, however, is not whether biotechnology has scientific merit. The real question is whether Pakistan possesses the regulatory capacity, biosafety infrastructure and market readiness to cultivate GMO food crops without compromising export competitiveness, biodiversity and farmer livelihoods.

Pakistan’s past experience with BT cotton offers an important lesson. Although genetically modified cotton initially helped control bollworm infestations, poor seed regulation, illegal seed multiplication, declining varietal purity and weak stewardship diluted many of its expected benefits. Before extending GMO technology to food crops such as maize, Pakistan must honestly assess whether its institutions are capable of managing the far more complex challenges associated with food crops? I would bluntly say they have miserably failed even in managing traditional crops, presence of aflatoxin, Maximum Residue Limits (MRLs) of pesticides and development of new high yield open pollinated varieties that reduce growers’ cultivation cost.

Maize deserves particular caution. Unlike self-pollinated crops, maize is naturally cross-pollinated, making unintended gene flow between GMO and non-GMO fields difficult to prevent. In Pakistan, where most farms are small and fragmented, maintaining effective segregation during cultivation, harvesting, transportation, storage and processing would be nearly impossible. Growers often murder their neighbor growers over water supply diversions and crop varieties grown next to their one of two acre farm land. GMO cultivation will further worsen the ecosystem of our agronomy.

Once contamination occurs, reversing it becomes both technically difficult and economically costly.

This challenge extends beyond farming. Pakistan already struggles to comply with international sanitary and phytosanitary (SPS) standards governing agricultural exports. Shipments of rice, fruits and vegetables have repeatedly faced difficulties because of excessive pesticide residues, weak traceability systems and inconsistent quality control. The European Union applies some of the world’s strictest MRLs, and failure to comply can result in rejected consignments and loss of market confidence.

Pakistan also faces a far more pressing food safety challenge: aflatoxin contamination. Maize, chillies, peanuts, animal feed, dairy milkand poultry meat are frequently vulnerable to aflatoxins produced by fungal infection during production and storage. Aflatoxin B1 is classified by the World Health Organization’s International Agency for Research on Cancer as a Group 1 carcinogen, meaning there is sufficient evidence that it causes cancer in humans. Pakistan should prioritize eliminating aflatoxin contamination through improved drying, storage, testing and enforcement before introducing another layer of regulatory complexity through GMO cultivation.

Supporters argue that GMO maize can increase productivity and reduce pesticide use. These benefits have been demonstrated under well-regulated agricultural systems, but next to impossible in Pakistan’s agriculture practices. However, technology alone cannot compensate for weak governance. Pakistan’s low agricultural productivity stems primarily from structural deficiencies, including inadequate research, poor extension services, inefficient irrigation, fragmented landholdings, post-harvest losses, limited mechanization, cross-border illicit seeds, and weak seed certification. Addressing these bottlenecks would likely generate greater long-term benefits than relying solely on genetic modification.

Economic realities also deserve attention. Pakistani farmers already face escalating production costs due to expensive imported hybrid seeds, fertilizers, pesticides, diesel, electricity and financing. Dependence on patented GMO seed technologies could further increase production costs and foreign exchange outflows while reducing farmers’ traditional ability to save seed. Agricultural modernization should strengthen national seed security rather than deepen import dependence.

International experience offers valuable lessons. Major agricultural exporters such as the United States, Brazil, Argentina and Canada cultivate GMO maize, soybean, canola oil seeds extensively under comprehensive biosafety and monitoring systems. By contrast, the European Union maintains one of the world’s strictest GMO regulatory regimes. While authorized GMO maize may be imported for food and animal feed under rigorous traceability and labeling requirements, commercial cultivation remains highly restricted, and several EU member states prohibit cultivation altogether.

The Netherlands illustrates this balanced approach. It does not commercially cultivate GMO maize or rice, yet it permits imports of approved GMO products in accordance with European Union regulations. This distinction is important. A country can benefit from international trade without necessarily exposing its own agricultural system to cultivation-related risks.

Pakistan has already experienced the commercial consequences of GMO-related concerns. In the past, Pakistani rice consignments exported to Europe encountered serious problems after unauthorized GMO contamination was detected, highlighting the vulnerability of premium export markets to even limited trace contamination. Restoring buyer confidence after such incidents is often far more costly than preventing contamination in the first place.

Agricultural exports are already under pressure. Rising production costs, climate-related losses, stricter SPS requirements and increasing global competition have eroded Pakistan’s competitiveness in rice, fruits and vegetables. Introducing GMO food crops without internationally credible biosafety, traceability and coexistence mechanisms could further complicate market access, particularly in premium destinations that demand certified non-GMO products.

This does not mean Pakistan should reject biotechnology. On the contrary, the country should invest aggressively in modern agricultural science. Gene editing, marker-assisted breeding, molecular diagnostics and climate-resilient crop development offer enormous opportunities to improve productivity while strengthening food security through affordability as well. Public-sector research institutions hardly commercialized any new high yield seeds. R&D requires greater investment to develop locally adapted crop varieties suited to Pakistan’s diverse agro-climatic conditions. How country can afford to pay high priced GMO companies seeds, their royalty and their branded pesticides recommended to use for their seeds?

Before commercializing GMO food crops, Pakistan first must fix economic stability, export led growth, establish a robust biosafety framework supported by independent scientific risk assessments, transparent food safety evaluations and accredited testing laboratories. Currently the country lacks comprehensive laboratories at port customs stage for DNA testing of imported/exported produces.

Effective traceability systems, coexistence protocols, liability mechanisms and continuous post-commercialization monitoring are essential to meet future challenges. Farmers, exporters and consumers deserve confidence that decisions are driven by science rather than commercial pressure.

The debate over GMO crops should not be framed as a contest between science and ideology. It should instead focus on national preparedness. Can Pakistan effectively regulate, monitor and segregate GMO and non-GMO crops while simultaneously addressing aflatoxin contamination, pesticide MRL violations, weak SPS compliance and fragmented farming systems?

Until the answer is unequivocally yes, Pakistan’s priority should be strengtheningagricultural governance rather than expanding GMO cultivation. The country must first fix the foundations of its agricultural system before embracing technologies that demand even stronger institutions. Only then can biotechnology become a genuine driver of food security, farmer prosperity and sustainable export growth rather than another source of avoidable risk.