The ongoing debate in India revolves around the adoption of genetically modified (GM) and non- GM corn varieties. Now- adays, Corn has become a prized commodity for Indian farmers due to its versatile applications. The government, in par allel, is championing corn as an alternative fuel source, capable of being blended with Ethanol With corn being a signif icant component of live stock is an im- perative to bolster corn.

Production in India according to a recent report in the Indian Economic Times, the revenue of the Indian poultry sector is projected to grow by 10% this year, indicative of positive industry per formance, particularly in output. Concurrently, the livestock segment is witnessing a commend able uptick, contribut ing 4.11% to the Indian total GDP and 25.6% to the total agricultural GDP of the nation. An India maize production report forecasts a Com pound Annual Growth Rate (CAGR) of 1.34% for 2021–31, trailing be hind the consumption growth rate pegged at 1.82% during the same period. Additionally, the proportion of maize al located for animal feed is anticipated to rise to ap proximately 54% by 2031 from the current 51%,

Potentially signally a shift towards
genetically modified crops. Advocates of GM Corn argue that its promo- tion is the sole solution to meet the surging de- mand for corn in India. With ethanol producers fiercely vying for maize supplies, the poultry in dustry, heavily reliant on maize for feed, has urged the Union Government to permit the import of genetically modified maize and soy meal Fur thermore, it advocates for the introduction of high-yielding GM seeds to enhance productivity nationwide. While sup porters claim that genet ically modified crops can solve immediate farming problems, closer exam ination uncovers many worries that need to be carefully thought about. GM corn does not direct ly augment yields, by rather tackles short-term pest-related issues, pro viding a temporary boost to productivity. However, is GM Corn

the exclusive remedy India’s maize demand surge? Before hastily endorsing it as the sole option, ought we not assess past experiences such as that of BT cot ton in India? GM Cotton was introduced in India in the 2002–03 season, and by 2007–08, nearly 90% of cotton farms in India were under GM Cotton. Afterward, the typical amount of cotton harvested dropped by 23%, going from 554 kilograms per hectare in the fiscal year 2008 to 429 kilograms per hect are in the fiscal year 2024 (an estimated figure). In stark contrast, Bangla desh witnessed a remark- able surge in cotton yield during this period, from 263 Kgs/ha to 737 Kgs/ha, The adoption of Hybrid BT cotton in India has led to a yield plateau, escalat ing production costs, and diminished productivity, resulting in decreased farmer revenues, cor related with heightened

behind this de dine remains unclear, In European countries, governments are promot ing non-GM corn and have banned GM Corn, While GM seeds offer traits like pest resistance and herbicide tolerance, they often entail higher costs and uncertainties regarding market accep tance. Non-GM maize presents an alternative that reduces reliance on expensive GM technolo- Ry potentially enhancing the economic viability of farming operations. European countries, in particular, impose strin gent regulations on GM crops, creating lucrative opportunities for farm ers producing non-GM maize. Moreover, niche markets seeking natural or organic products often favour non-GM maize, enabling farmers to cater demands and command premium prices. In an era where food transparency and traceability are par- amount, non-GM status serves as a selling point for farmers, enhancing their market competi tiveness. Recently, Mex ico has also decided to han genetically modified corn, as reported in the news. According to an article published by Lucy Sharratt, Coordinator of the Canadian Biotech nology Action Network, a project of Make Way Charitable Society, Mex ko’s restrictions on GM corn aim to safeguard the integrity of native corn from GM contamination and to protect human health. the Canadian Biotechnology Action Network is a large net work of farmers and en vironmental groups that has been monitoring the. use of genetically modi fied organisms (GMOs) for over 15 years. As per them, their research con- tinues to uncover indica- tors of potential harm to humans from consuming GM insect-resistant corn. Most GM corn plants are genetically modified to kill insect pests, express ing a toxin from the soil bacteria Bacillus thuring- iensis (Bt), known to harm the guts of specific types of insects but not others. Farmers have long utilized Bt as a spray to combat pests, but the Bt toxins in GM crops dif fer in structure, function, and biological effects. Indeed, peer-reviewed studies across the scien- tific literature persistently find that Bt toxins in GM. plants can harm insects (spiders, wasps, lady- bugs, and lacewings, for example) that are not the intended targets.