The recent and much-awaited approval of 32 Bacillus thuringiensis, commonly known as Bt, by the Technical Assessment Committee has triggered an interesting national debate.

After all it is a business of billions, which is at stake now. Though the approval is not final and all varieties would now go to the National Bio-safety Commission for commercial licensing to hit the cotton field, one significant step has been taken en-route to final approval.

The differing gene expression in these 32 seed varieties — 14 recommended approved by Punjab, nine approved in 2010 and 11 fresh ones — have generated a new debate: whether the step is worth it. For critics, the TAC has only added to the cotton chaos that has been persisting in the market for the last many years. For the defenders, however, it is step forward to bring some sanity in seed sector.

The critics claim all these varieties differ in the Bt (toxin level) expression, which is necessary to kill the pests. They think that varying toxin level was precisely what hurt the cotton crop in the last few years. Though some of the varieties, which had low toxin level, helped the pest to develop immunity, the new varieties would only maintain the situation as the toxin level in these 32 varieties ranges from 0.58 to 1.60 micro grams per gram. The United States Department of Agriculture has set the level at 1.5 micro grams per gram.

In fact the varying toxin levels did create problems; new pests, which have never seen before, are regularly attacking the crop.

The defenders argue that toxin level in the seed differ not because of the (Bt) gene expression in them, but the host varieties. The level also depends on a variety of variables, like the timing of the sample, weather impact and regional factor. Thus, the differing expression level should not be a decisive factor for the approval and rejection of a particular variety because of so many variables involved in the process.

Critics insist that in Bt cotton, only Bt level matters and only it should cause approval or rejection of a particular variety. If Pakistani scientists think that those international standards are not applicable to local ecological realities, they should come up with their own standards before rejecting others.

The policy-makers have an explanation of their own: cotton sowing in Pakistan is spread on over six million acres, across the country – read different ecological zones — where weather, the temperature stress and water availability fluctuate grossly. From March to September, weather varies sharply. It is neither possible nor practical to expect same toxin level to behave with some kind of uniformity. On top of that, if a single variety, with highest level of toxin is accepted and officially recommended, it will create double jeopardy for the country. Firstly, it would create a monopoly situation in the country, with massive social and financial cost for farmers.

Secondly, and more importantly, if that variety becomes vulnerable to pest, the entire crop would sink in one go — triggering a national financial and social crisis. In such situation, replacing seed would take years and take massive toll on crop. Thus, the new approach is to let it be multi-seed market, where each farmer can buy a seed according to his own ecological and soil conditions. In the past, a single variety market, though bringing huge successes in some years created problems in long run. When that particular variety started rusted, it not only took national production figures down but replacing seed for more than six million acres became a national nightmare. With nine approved varieties, which also differed in toxin level, in 2010, the pest hotspots have decreased to less than two per cent of the total area in the last few years.

That is why the policymakers have decided induct more varieties with differing toxin levels and let the farmers choose the right according to his own ecological and soil requirements. The TAC has approved 15 varieties that Punjab had recommended earlier and had been pressing their commercialisation for the last one year.

It has revisited nine varieties that it approved in 2010 but their certification expired last year, leaving the market without any officially approved variety. The additional approvals were meant to create competition in the market.