CSR: 5. The change in process

Issues of sustainability have been debated upon since the 1970s in the West, and the process now continues in the global forum. Companies are realizing that several past assumptions and practices are unsustainable in the changing world.

Concerns for the company's longevity in the new age now forces consideration for other people and environments. The global emphasis is also shifting from positional and group power to less obvious power sources - expertise, creativity and networking. These have been instrumental in the phenomenal rise of the Internet. Since then, organizational structures and the nature of work have been transforming. Virtual offices allow personnel to come to ‘work’ even when located in different regions. Innovations, solutions, information and opinions spread exponentially across the world.

Communications have been facilitated. Global teams pool resources in joint ventures, collaborations, and problem solving exercises across boundaries and geographical borders. For example, computer-aided technology allows medical help, even complicated surgery by specialists thousands of miles away. Connectivity to remote parts of the globe expands the knowledge base. Access to higher education empowers the once disadvantaged - women and other minority groups. Their competing on equal terms with the privileged is now less of an impossible dream.

With globalization, companies seeking new markets perceived exciting new avenues in other continents. This led to spate of mergers and takeovers occurred during the 1990s. Companies based in different regions of the world came together based on the numbers. Lack of knowledge or experience of one another’s values and cultures merited little attention.

For example, in the car industry, American Chrysler and German Daimler merged into one giant company assuming that their gains with access to new markets, would equate the sum of the parts and more. But then it was discovered that, within the same organization, cultures termed distinctly “scrappy” and “stodgy” do not quite jell! Inevitably, the anticipated success of the global presence failed to occur.

The culture clashes raised global awareness about people issues in diversity. In learning about other cultures, people discover their similarities. The easing of constraints in India and China has allowed these two most populated in the world to make appreciable economic strides forward, with higher growth rates. Migration of skilled workforces is now bi-directional, not only East to West, but increasingly West to East, as Asia is said to be becoming the new economic frontier.

Those companies working at global “acculturation” first are the most likely to have realistic success in the new markets. Managers in charge of a knowledge-based global workforce also need new people skills to be able to fulfill their roles. Quoting research, the article Crosscultural Awareness explains:

Earlier it was generally accepted that organizations required three groups of specialists to be effective: business managers, country managers, and function managers. But now, with the trend to go global, the new important requirement is for a unique fourth kind of specialist manager – a leader with global mindset skills for successful intercultural management.

Societies around the world are becoming more heterogeneous with the changing demographics of constituent groups. Consumers are no longer a homogeneous mass with product wants easy to identify and manipulate. Social representative groups have buying needs different to one another. The business strategy of the new millennium should have specific rather of broad classifications of consumers.

The company that tunes into “culture”, “lifestyle” and so on, can innovate or design product fit. Investments in research about possible consumer need, want, like and dislike along cultural lines, could reap returns, with “culture sensitivity” augmenting the corporate bottomline. The article “Homework” illustrates the context:

…the research - the homework - is meant to set up effective performance. For example, three months after the launch of its new cultural website aimed at ethnic immigrant communities, Lufthansa had 190,000 visitors and revenue raked in through the site was 91 percent over their target. Because they remembered cultural occasions, their particular significances to the immigrant people, and associated their customary travel plans with interesting packages…

Ethnic communities are the new consumer units targeted in many marketing initiatives. However, no company can afford complaisance. “Culture”, even ethnic culture, is ever changing. The article Crosscultural Awareness notes:

Culture is not a static ‘thing’, but is constantly being created, expressed, affirmed and enforced. It is evolving unceasingly, from continuing conversations and negotiations about individuals, about the organization and about the environment.

With availability of information is literally at the fingertips, consumer groups have become far more aware of their own needs and the products that will fulfill them best. Along with the demographics, consumer tastes and their assertiveness have changed.

Next…branding

CSR: 4. The meaning of bottom line

Corporate social responsibility is not a new concept. Although reformers have called for change in practices over time, its enforcement not been adequately organized. Disciplining operative processes with respect to society and environment, thus left to individual conscience, has generally been ignored or overlooked.

“Compulsions” determine what the company wants to do to achieve its business objectives. “Constraints” determine how the company achieves the goal of free enterprise. A healthy balance between compulsions (the ‘what’) and constraints (the ‘how’) is necessary for the long-term. However, most business organizations tend to tilt towards their compulsions of target gains, rationalizing that to make an omlette you have to break some eggs.

During the industrial age, many Western companies preferred to locate production and manufacturing plants in nations across the world, attracted by cheap labour and comparatively minimal legislative constraints. The dangers to health and environment were also then, far from home. In India, for example, the holdings of many of these companies survived her Independence, and remained the legacy of colonial times.

Union Carbide had designed a pesticide production plant at its premises located in the heart of Bhopal, a populous city in India. In 1984, the fatal leaking of methyl isocyanate caused the Bhopal Gas Tragedy, which some have also termed the “Hiroshima of the chemical industry”. Twenty thousand men, women and children living in proximity to the plant, died instantly inhaling the gas. With minutes families were decimated. The diffusion of poisoned air into the atmosphere injured three hundred thousand more.

Over 120,000 survivors are left still in need of medical help they cannot afford. Despite calls for humanitarian restitution, Union Carbide and the new owners, Dow Chemicals continue to assert that, further to the minimal compensation they paid in 1989, they have no obligations remaining to the people and the place. Meanwhile thousands of tons of toxic waste lie exposed and untreated on the factory premises even today, nearly 25 years later.

Business houses tend to consider public interest to be inimical to entrepreneurship. Social groups demand constraints on their activities and a proactive giving back to the society that nurtures their enterprise. One side takes ‘bottom line’ to solely mean their profits; the other argues against the exclusion of beneficence to people and planet.

Company awareness of the context of its existence would be “enlightened self-interest”. Cochrane says the process involves the adherence to standards at three levels:

• public policy
• internal standards
• actual performance

Consistency in doing so preserves “integrity”, whereas “inconsistency breeds cynicism”. In the race to get ahead, political and business leaders have often displayed this cynical inconsistency towards others sharing the same sphere. Thus, globalization, which has allowed multinational corporations to achieve dizzy heights of success, has also witnessed rapacious damage to human and other resources.

The point is that in being present in the same space, every entity, group and organization relates to every other. The greater system, the universe, is composed of various subsets - each encircles its own unique constituents of state, corporate, family, or even individual. The subsets exist within this social matrix, relating to the macro (universe) as well as to each micro (organism) through dynamic interfaces that give rise to unique issues and energies between them.

The wholesome growth and development of any one depends on the relationships it forms with the others. The functional interrelationships between the various subsystems (digestive, circulatory, endocrine, etc.) within a living organism are vital to its wellbeing. In the same way, each subset’s contribution to the health of the total system extends its own longevity.

Elkington coined the term ‘triple bottom line’ to explain the evolving new reality. Corporations not only add economic value, they also add or destroy environmental and social value. Change, he predicts, is imminent in the form of a “global cultural revolution”. This revolution, powered by business, will precipitate paradigm shifts in seven important areas: markets, values, transparency, life-cycle technology, partnerships, time and corporate governance.

Altered lines of thinking in both politics and business are pressured by successive waves of public reaction. Elkington observes:

• Wave 1 brought an understanding that environmental impacts and natural resource demands have to be limited…
• Wave 2 brought a wider realization that new kinds of production technologies and new kinds of products are needed…
• Wave 3 focuses on the growing recognition that sustainable development will require profound changes in the governance of corporations and in the whole process of globalization, putting a renewed focus on government and on civil society.

Corporate governance, for instance, is now transitioning from “exclusive” from others to “inclusive” of others, as partnerships become the business mantra of the twenty-first century.

Next…change

CSR: 3. Exercise of domination

Technology has driven far-reaching changes around the world. It has allowed individuals and groups to exercise power and control. In the process, the lack of social responsibility has often been displayed in business and politics.

The purpose of tool making through the ages has been to improve human capabilities in the fight for survival, to hunt and gather food, to protect against the environment, predators and other aggressors. The holders of technology acquired power and ipso facto control over their own destinies. Industrial developments encouraged the shift in perspective from control over one’s life towards control over the environment.

‘Power’ may be defined as the capacity to influence people, events, and even the direction of change. ‘Control’ might mean to exercise a dominating influence. Although different words, ‘power’ and ‘control’ are often assumed to mean the same - dominance over processes, people and other resources.

Power has several sources, including position and group. These two types of power generally prevail. Positional power is legitimized by mandates acquired from states, or designations in organizations. In similar fashion, group power follows from membership in a specific faction, community, or religious group.In political and business areas power tends to become control, as in waging proxy wars, causing damage to the environment and people, involvements in scams or financial malpractices, etc. The events confirm Hobbs’s statement that power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely.

During much of the twentieth century the destructive sophistication of technology was witnessed, like the hydrogen and atom bombs dropped in World War II. Further, power dynamics between capitalist and communist ideologies led to proxy wars being fought in other countries, devastating nations of the ‘third world’. For example, new military hardware, napalm and other horrific weapons were experimented with in the “killing fields” of Asia.

The end of the Cold War led to the dismantling of the Soviet Union and her Eastern Bloc satellite states. Many of these countries still struggle with their national identity and relationships with one another. Military organizations of most countries today perceive their defensive weaponry inadequate without nuclear, biological and chemical warheads. The US-led coalition forces are now engaged in wars of liberation in countries under individual or group tyranny. The goal is to install new democracies in those regions, although local resistance to their presence is extreme.

The abuse of resources by production and manufacturing houses, like the indiscriminate release of industrial wastes into rivers, toxic gases polluting the air and thinning the ozone layer, have been implicated in global warming, changing climate patterns and new diseases. Indiscriminate hunting has also endangered many animal species, among them tigers, whales and dolphins. Multinational corporations (MNCs) have at opportunity, flouted human rights and environmental concerns in developing nations, and are commonly viewed as symbols of capitalistic greed in those regions.

The economic downturn that hit the Western world the hardest exposed the ‘rot’ in management circles even at home. Individuals at the top of the pyramid entrusted with steering the corporation in the ‘right’ direction used organizational positions to personal advantage. Power and policy was utilized to feather their own nests, defrauding their people and the general public. The effects of the ethical bankruptcy cascaded into the global financial collapse.

Business and political compulsions have created the “conflicts” that divide people. The single-minded pursuit of advantage has retarded healthy development in human relations. I t has instead borne bitter fruit - us-and-them polarizations on the basis of race, religion and culture, and vengeful reactivity. The privileged have grown richer and greedier while the poor, more disadvantaged and resentful. The accumulated negativity displays in their eagerness to embrace any cause that advocates the removal of perceived “inequalities” through violence.

This has culminated in the rise of global terrorism. The export of terror has become lucrative trade, with the underprivileged classes the main sources of potential suicide bombers. They play out ideological convictions, or enlist merely to provide the dependents they leave behind some economic means of survival.

The urban nature of terrorism, targeting densely populated metropolitan areas using men, women and children, has rendered conventional military warfare almost obsolete. No country is free from the fear of attack either from outside or from within its territorial boundaries. The point is self-interested domination that shows little consideration for other groups in the same universe, reaps a similar harvest.

Next… bottom line

CSR: 2. The concept of trusteeship

Collectivistic cultures generally include social responsibilities in their activities, strongly influenced by religious and cultural values handed down generation to generation through community interactions. In the India of early history, social responsibility marked social behaviour. Ethics in politics and business were also based on these values. However, centuries of later colonizations, wrought dilutions in these traditions as Western practices took root.

The values-based social context dates back at least three millennia to the Indus Valley Civilization. Traditions originating then regulated community living and trade practices in those times, and beyond. In terms of economic power, during the reign of the Maurya dynasty, India’s influence extended through the Middle East even to Europe. She has been a formidable presence in Asia through much of the ancient and mediaeval ages, rivaled at times only by China.

Eighteenth century onwards, however, there was a steep and rapid downfall both in nationhood and economics. European adventurers - Dutch, Portuguese, French and especially the English, arrived in the region as traders, and went on to become rulers. Following the Western economic concept of self-interest, the East India Company resorted to guile and deception to appropriate power over people and resources. Eventually, the entire Indian subcontinent was subject to the Crown, ensuring that the sun never set on the British Empire.

The autocratic colonial practices also gave birth to the Independence Movement in India. Mahatma Gandhi, the architect of the non-violent struggle, organized the Salt March at Dandi, against the imposition of new taxes on salt. This symbolic confrontation of foreign occupation with only 78 followers inspired aspirations of freedom amongst the masses. Tom Weber writes:

The Salt March is about a battle by an astute political campaigner to free his country from the yoke of British colonialism. Here we have the skinny, scantily dressed 61- year-old Mahatma armed with nothing but a bamboo staff marching to the sea with a handful of followers, mostly young, in an attempt to liberate India.

Gandhi was not an economist, but a transformational leader who advocated nationalism (swadeshi) socially and self-rule (swaraj) politically and economically. He believed that the exercise of ownership was a selfish and dysfunctional pathway that bred inequalities and conflict amongst people. He wrote in the “Harijan” (the word coined to uplift ‘untouchable’ castes) in 1937:

True economics stands for social justice; it promotes the good of all equally, including the weakest, and is indispensable for decent life…

The accumulation of wealth by the privileged few signifies a disregard for society. Gandhi’s concept of trusteeship, in which dignity is integral, is based on traditional moral and spiritual values. Kumar explains the socialistic overtones of the concept:

Trusteeship provides a means of transforming the present capitalist order into an egalitarian one... Under such an economic order, the character of production will be determined by social necessity and not by personal greed.

Trusteeship departs significantly from other prominent socialist philosophy. It may be said to call for evolution of the mind, in place of a bloody revolution. Kumar says further:

Marxian socialism aims at the destruction of the class called capitalists, whereas the Gandhian approach is not to destroy the institution, but to reform it… Gandhian socialism aims at a change of heart on the part of the rich. There is no place for violence, but only trust. The common man trusts his trustee and the latter plays the role of a custodian.

The leadership in any sphere merely fulfils the role of a custodian of the systemic values, aspirations, resources and so on. The trustee or steward is entrusted to charter the right course for the collective. In an egalitarian society, they are the best people for the job, rewarded by the system according to their needs (not wants).

Colonial rule depleted India’s national coffers. As a nascent independent country post-British rule, she faced economic penury. Despite becoming a democracy, for at least three decades post-independence, the central political leadership determined the course of all development in the country. Some loosening of this government control also over business occurred in the late `70s and early `80s.

The economic reforms and liberalizations conducive to global entrepreneurship took shape only from 1991. The philosophy has undergone considerable change from the Gandhian concept of trusteeship. Nevertheless, India’s relative escape from the global impact of recession has been attributed to the restrictive measures that still remain.

Next…domination

CSR: 1. The image is everything?

Businesses are valued for the profits they bring to those who run them. Corporate bodies leave few stones unturned, aggressively seeking the brand loyalty that ensures consumer support, and thereby a swelling bottom line.

Their heavy investments in advertising are meant to serve a dual purpose. They introduce to target groups the products they are being encouraged to buy; they also build an image in the consumer’s mind to identify with, clearly associated with the company. It is said that image is everything - it can influence sales, sometimes beyond the product quality.

Hence, image creation and nurturance is assiduous. For example, in 1924, the American tobacco company Marlboro introduced a new product, the filter-tipped cigarette. To reassure smokers there was no change in flavour, the caption “Mild as May” was used in advertisements. As a result, the filter-tips were perceived as just appropriate for women!


To attract the larger consumer body, the image had to be transformed. From the 1950s onwards, a number of Marlboro Men appeared on hoardings, newspapers and magazines around the world. Initially, genuine men of action were used. The first, Clarence Long, was a foreman at a Texas cattle ranch. The rugged and tough ‘Wild West’ appearance fit the truly masculine requirement. Propped simply with “only nature and a (filter-tipped) cigarette”, the theme fired public imagination, and made Marlboro’s smokes fashionable for men.

Time however, caught up with the company’s high-impact ad campaign. It was reported that several of Marlboro’s ‘Men’ suffered from lung cancer and other nicotine related diseases. Now, since these men were of mature age when they were inducted into the campaign, it is likely lifestyles set over years before coming aboard contributed most to their health conditions. Nevertheless, strong protests were made that with the romanticized advertisements, younger age groups idolizing them would be encouraged into early smoking addictions.

Surveys confirm that an “overwhelming majority of smokers begin tobacco use before they reach adulthood”. Awareness groups launched vigorous anti-smoking campaigns to force the tobacco industry to acknowledge the social responsibility of warning people about the health consequences of tobacco use. Legislative changes led to statutory health warnings being included on all cigarette packs, as well as on their advertisements. California Health Services (USA), for instance, utilizes the iconic poster series to drive home quite a different message.


Companies are now being awakened to corporate social responsibility (CSR) as a crucial issue in business sustainability. Fact is a company cannot hold itself aloof from the reality around it. Its business exists because of society, and hence responsibility cannot be denied for the effects of its tactics on the surroundings – the environment, consumers, employees, communities, stakeholders and all other human and non-human members of the system at large.

Essentially CSR (also known as corporate citizenship, sustainable responsible business or corporate social performance) refers to ethical and socially relevant business practices being conducted at the management’s own volition. Respecting the human and environmental resources it receives, the self-regulated company accepts its duty to the society that shelters it, at home and abroad. As a matter of corporate policy, environmental concerns, laws, international norms, standards of ethical behaviour, and social and community developments are integrated into the pursuant business model.

Next…trusteeship

Biofoods in India: 6. References

References for Biofoods in India posts 1-5:

1. Banytė, Jūratė., Jokšaitė, Eglė., & Virvilaitė, Regina. “Relationship of Consumer Attitude and Brand: Emotional Aspect” COMMERCE OF ENGINEERING DECISIONS. 65 ISSN 1392-2785 ENGINEERING ECONOMICS. 2007. No 2 (52) pp 65-77.
2. “Bill Gates Backs Genetically Modified Food Research” whybiotech.com Council For Biotechnology Information. February 2^nd 2010.
3. Burton, M., & Pearse, D. (2002). Consumer attitudes towards genetic modification, functional foods, and microorganisms: A Choice modeling experiment for beer. AgBioForum, 5(2), 51-58.
4. Carey, John and others. “Are Bio-foods Safe?” Science and Technology: Biotech. BusinessWeek: December 20, 1999.
5. Coale, Kristi. “The Biofood battle” Investigation. Centre for Investigative Reporting, California, USA. August 1, 2000.
6. Cummins, Ronnie. “Biodiversity Bombshell”. organicconsumers.org BioDemocracy News #37 Frankencorn Fight: Cautionary Tales. 10 Jan 2002
7. Doyle, Mark. “The limits of a Green Revolution?” news.bbc.co.uk BBC News Special Report. BBC World Service Documentary Archive. 29 March 2007.
8. “Food Biotechnology: Consumer perceptions of food biotechnology” SUMMARY OF KEY FINDINGS FOR INDIA. ASIAN FOOD INFORMATION CENTRE (AFIC) 2008.
9. “GM peas cause immune response – A gap in the approval process?” gmo-compass.org GMO Compass. 3 January 2006.
10. “Greenpeace uncovers illegal GM food in India” greenpeace.org News. Greenpeace India. May 02.2008.
11. Gruère, G.P, & Rao, S.R. (2007). A review of international labeling policies of genetically modified food to evaluate India’s proposed rule. AgBioForum, 10(1), 51-64.
12. Hazell, Peter B.R. “Green Revolution curse or blessing?” Ifpri.org International Food Policy Research Institute, USA. A Future Harvest Centre. 2002.
13. Hoban, Thomas J. “Public Attitudes towards Agricultural Biotechnology.” fao.org ESA Working Paper No. 04-09. May 2004 Agricultural and Development Economics Division, The Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations.
14. "India rejects GM food from USA" biotech-info.net The AgBioIndia Bulletin. International Policy. January 23, 2003.
15. Jain, Sonu. “Doors opened for processed GM foods to enter market” indiaexpress.com India Express. September 26, 2007.
16. Kent, L. (2004). “What's the holdup? Addressing constraints to the use of plant biotechnology in developing countries.” AgBioForum, 7(1&2), 63-69.
17. Krishna, J. “Activists Gift 'last GM free Brinjals' to 150 Tamilnadu MLAs” greenpeace.org News. Greenpeace India. January 28.2009.
18. Krishna, Vijesh V.; Qaim, Matin “Consumer Attitudes toward GM Food and Pesticide Residues in India” (Abstract) Review of Agricultural Economics, Volume 30, Number 2, Summer 2008, pp. 233-251(19).
19. Moeskops, Oddette. “Resistance: how do you handle your emotional response towards it?” Management site for and by professionals
20. Munkvold, Gary P., and Hellmich, Richard L. “Genetically modified, insect resistant corn: Implications for disease management” APSnet Feature, October 15 thru November 30, 1999, APSnet Plant Pathology Online.
21. Ramaswami, B. (2007). Biofortified crops and biotechnology: A political economy landscape for India. AgBioForum, 10(3), 170-177.

Biofoods in India: 5. Coping with threat

While replicating experiments to confirm earlier findings, other researchers discovered an area of concern that those involved with creative biotechnology had failed to consider - that the disease resistance biofoods displayed, depended on environmental factors. In places where the disease-producing fungi species are stronger or that which witnesses an outbreak of the disease, the artificially developed hybrid becomes as vulnerable as the non-hybrids forms.

A study conducted by CSRIO in 2006 reported findings that led to several similar GM bio-foods projects in Australia being scratched from production. In them, gene transfer had been attempted between bean and pea to make the latter resistant to pea weevils attack. Safety tests conducted over a specific period by independent agencies found the product allergen–free. In further testing however, it was discovered that over time, the transgenic pea altered the structure of protein formations enough to caused immune reactions among certain test animals.

The consumer resistance to GM-products gained momentum with what has been named “frankencorn.” This is a Bt corn hybrid type that was taken to and flourished in Mexico. In the process, the existing biodiversity gene pool comprising of 20,000 corn varieties and plant relatives were in danger of being choked out of existence with the “pollution". Experiments on mice conducted in Europe showed that a sustained diet of Bt corn does eventually cause health problems. The biotech firms that had licenced the product, however, continued to aggressively market in the region, pricing it lower than the local non-hybrid grains.

Regulatory norms in many countries of the world are generally not as wide-angled as those in the West. Many business houses attempt to slip through the loopholes that they find in other parts of the world. For example, the purview of regulatory body GEAC (India) is only “environmental safety”. By applying to this body, the biotech companies obtained exemption certificates for their processed bio-foods. The branded potato chips that contained ingredients banned in the West may not have harmed the environment, but there was no gainsaying the fact that the human consumers (who fell outside the regulatory purview), were at risk.

Regulatory bodies in different countries differ in their focus for mandatory labelling. Some focus on finished product, which needs a label only if traces are found on testing, and others on technology process that requires GM labels being pasted always. Because these add to costs that eat into returns on investment, companies prefer to avoid them. Such tactics contributes to the public acquiring blanket sensitising against the biofoods, the companies that produce them and the scientists associated with their research. In India, biotechnology is already stridently opposed by the nation’s NGOs, and supported by their overseas-based counterparts like Greenpeace. New GM-product labelling rules now proposed in the country may turn out more stringent than elsewhere.

Backing GM-foods production at the NDTV-hosted world economic forum seminar 'Rethinking how to feed the world' in Davos recently, Bill Gates put the onus on national Governments. They would need to take the call on the issue of starvation amongst their people, weighing the benefits of biofoods against the risks.

Western governments are generally pro-business. Heads of State help to open new markets by lobbying for the multinational companies. The Indian governance, in contrast, is pro-poor and hence economic reforms across the country are slow. The system responds quickly to acute environmental disasters like floods or famine, but is far less active in responding to chronic problems of poverty, malnutrition or sanitation. On the question of biotechnology, the political parties whether in power or in opposition, have perched on the fence, with no definitive stand on the issue, either for or against.

Fact is creating and testing products in laboratory conditions is only half the job done. Companies cannot ignore the need for stringent, ongoing safety testing. These identify potentially toxic side effects in different climate zones and bio-diversity. The imminent costs of the process would reduce through meaningful partnerships with local scientific institutions. They would be better equipped to pursue the issues in their specific environments, and perhaps devise innovative solutions to eliminate the errors arising in their jurisdiction.

Scientists and companies also need to rethink their assumptions about products and their potential consumers. In the age of information, people no longer appreciate being told what to buy. Being far more cognizant of their own needs today, people resent coercion or deception. For instance, the past practice of corporate bodies of dumping surpluses on the unsuspecting developing nations should urgently be eschewed. Transparency in business, like providing necessary information on product labels, would not only enable consumers take informed choices on product selections, it would stimulate their continued satisfaction and brand loyalty.

With better knowledge about the scientific techniques that benefit both people and environment, consumers may understand the source of their resistance – largely a carryover from the past. Many biotechnology advocates believe the consumer resistance will eventually die down. Australia, like Europe and unlike India, has so far harboured strong resistance to GM-technology. Studies conducted there have found positive indications of a thaw in attitudes resisting change. It may be hoped that in time, the improved “next generation” of bio-foods will improve consumer acceptance enough to actually combat world hunger.

References…next