à qui profitent les plantes gm ?

The report challenges the claims of the biotechnology industry, specifically the ISAAA, regarding the success and benefits of GM crops. It argues that GM plants are primarily used for animal feed and biofuels rather than human nutrition and that they lead to increased pesticide use, soil degradation, and the displacement of indigenous peoples. The document specifically critiques the 'climate scam'—the claim that GM crops can mitigate climate change through carbon sequestration or drought resistance—and proposes agroecology as a sustainable alternative.

• The vast majority of GM crops are not grown for human consumption but for animal feed, biofuels, and cotton. In 2009, soy and maize alone accounted for 83% of GM crops, with soy representing 52% and maize 31%.
• The report claims that ISAAA data is unreliable and inflated through methods such as 'double counting' traits, where a single hectare with multiple genetic traits is counted multiple times to exaggerate growth rates.
• In the United States, GM crops have led to an increase in pesticide volumes. A 2009 study indicated that GM hectares were treated with 26% more pesticides than conventional varieties, partly due to the emergence of glyphosate-resistant 'super weeds'.
• In the Southern Cone of South America, the expansion of GM soy has caused severe social and environmental damage, including the violent expulsion of indigenous communities and peasants from their lands and significant deforestation.
• The report argues that the claim that GM crops mitigate climate change is a 'scam'. It states that no commercial GM plant has been designed to increase yields or store more carbon, and that 'no-till' farming can be practiced with any crop and does not necessarily sequester more carbon than conventional methods.
• Biotechnology companies are accused of using patents to privatize natural genetic resources, with 532 patents covering 55 types of 'climate genes' to restrict access for researchers and farmers.
• Agroecology is presented as the viable alternative to GM crops for addressing food security and climate change, as it focuses on biodiversity, organic matter return to the soil, and local knowledge.
• In the European Union, GM crop cultivation has decreased for five consecutive years as of 2009, with Germany becoming the sixth EU country to ban the MON810 maize variety.

APA

Riley, P., Chandrasekaran, K., & Hall, R. (2010). à qui profitent les plantes gm ? Friends of the Earth International. https://www.foei.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/12/23-foei-gmo-report-2010-fr-colour-lr.pdf

Chicago

Riley, Pete, Kirtana Chandrasekaran, and Ronnie Hall. à qui profitent les plantes gm ? Friends of the Earth International, 2010. https://www.foei.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/12/23-foei-gmo-report-2010-fr-colour-lr.pdf.

Wikipedia

{{cite report |last1=Riley |first1=Pete |last2=Chandrasekaran |first2=Kirtana |last3=Hall |first3=Ronnie |title=à qui profitent les plantes gm ? |publisher=Friends of the Earth International |date=September 2010 |url=https://www.foei.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/12/23-foei-gmo-report-2010-fr-colour-lr.pdf |access-date=23 October 2026 |via=Climate Insights Directory}}

BibTeX

@techreport{riley2010qui, author = {Riley, Pete and Chandrasekaran, Kirtana and Hall, Ronnie}, title = {{à qui profitent les plantes gm ?}}, institution = {Friends of the Earth International}, year = {2010}, month = sep, url = {https://www.foei.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/12/23-foei-gmo-report-2010-fr-colour-lr.pdf}, urldate = {2026-10-23}, note = {Indexed by Climate Insights Directory} }