The recent revelation that Nigerians have been consuming genetically modified beans since 2019 has sparked widespread concern and outrage. The Bt-cowpea, a variety of beans, a genetically engineered variety of beans, has been commercialised and widely adopted without public discourse, labelling, or transparency. Sunday Ehigiator explores the state of GMO regulation in Nigeria, the controversies surrounding Bt-cowpea, and the implications of a food system where millions unknowingly consume genetically engineered foods, raising questions about informed consent and the right to know what we eat. 

O

n a typical morning in Lagos, Zainab heads to Mile 12 Market, clutching a faded shopping bag and mentally ticking off her grocery list: rice, beans, tomatoes, palm oil.

Like many Nigerians, she is mindful of her spending, juggling high food prices with feeding her family of five. But what Zainab, like millions of Nigerians, is completely unaware of is that she may be feeding her family genetically modified organisms (GMOs), without ever being told.

Genetically modified organisms have steadily and quietly entered Nigeria’s food supply over the last decade. Driven by promises of increased yield, pest resistance, and food security, GMO crops such as Bt-cowpea (a variety of beans) and genetically engineered maize have been adopted in limited but expanding capacities.

Yet, the fundamental question remains: do Nigerians know what they’re eating? The answer, grounded in regulatory loopholes, poor labelling laws, and limited public awareness, is a resounding no!

What Are GMOs?

Genetically modified organisms (GMOs) are plants, animals, or microorganisms whose genetic makeup has been altered in a way that does not occur naturally through mating or natural recombination. In agriculture, GMOs are typically engineered to enhance certain traits, such as resistance to pests or herbicides, improved nutritional content, or greater yield.

Globally, GM crops have been in commercial use since the 1990s, with countries like the United States, Brazil, Argentina, and India leading in cultivation. Common GM crops include maize, soybeans, cotton, and canola.

In theory, GMOs offer powerful solutions to agricultural challenges, particularly for countries like Nigeria, where food insecurity, pest infestations, and climate change pose serious threats to food production.

However, the issue is far more complex than science and yield. It touches on ethics, corporate power, sovereignty, and perhaps most crucially, consumer choice.

Nigeria’s Food Insecurity and Technological Hope

Nigeria, with over 200 million people, is Africa’s most populous nation. The country has long struggled with food insecurity. In 2023, the UN’s Food and Agriculture Organisation (FAO) estimated that over 26.5 million Nigerians were food insecure, with millions facing crisis levels of hunger.

The reasons are multifaceted: climate change-induced droughts and floods, insurgency and farmer-herder clashes, inflation, poor infrastructure, and a lack of access to credit and technology.

Against this backdrop, agricultural biotechnology has been marketed by some as the silver bullet that could rescue Nigeria from its perpetual food crisis.

GMOs as Solution?

In 2015, Nigeria passed the National Biosafety Management Agency (NBMA) Act, which established the NBMA as the regulatory agency to oversee GMO approvals, imports, trials, and commercialisation.

By 2019, Nigeria approved the commercial release of its first genetically modified crop, Bt-cowpea (beans), genetically engineered to resist the Maruca vitrata pest, a notorious insect that causes up to 80 per cent yield loss in traditional cowpea farms.

The GMO Beans Controversy: Bt-cowpea (SAMPEA 20-T)

Cowpea (popularly called “beans” in Nigeria) is a staple food across the country, consumed by millions in various forms; from moi-moi to akara, and beans porridge, etc.

In 2019, the NBMA approved the commercial release of Bt-cowpea (marketed as SAMPEA 20-T), developed by Nigeria’s Institute for Agricultural Research (IAR) in partnership with the African Agricultural Technology Foundation (AATF). The beans were engineered to contain a gene from the Bacillus thuringiensis (Bt) bacterium that kills the Maruca pest.

The developers touted the beans as a victory for Nigerian science and food security. Farmers reportedly observed reduced use of pesticides, better yield, and improved income. Yet, the approval was met with stiff resistance from several civil society groups, environmentalists, and food safety advocates.

Some of their main concerns included issues around insufficient testing of these crops, with many arguing that food safety assessments were rushed and lacked transparency. Furthermore, the development of the cowpea in collaboration with foreign biotech interests also sparked fears about seed sovereignty and corporate control.

Another concern is the lack of labelling and traceability of GM beans. Without a mandate to label or segregate these crops from conventional varieties, consumers are unable to make informed choices about what they eat. This lack of transparency also raises cultural and religious concerns, particularly in a deeply religious society where the origin of genetic material matters.

Ecological risks are also a major worry, with activists warning that the modified beans could lead to pest resistance, affect non-target insects, or crossbreed with local varieties.

It also sparked cultural and religious concerns; for a deeply religious society like Nigeria, the origin of genetic material matters. For instance, genes from pigs would be unacceptable to Muslims. Without proper labelling, such concerns are impossible to address.

In the same year, 2019, a coalition of 50 civil society organisations, including the Health of Mother Earth Foundation (HoMEF), filed a lawsuit at the Federal High Court in Abuja to halt the release of Bt-cowpea. While the case is still in court, the beans are already on Nigerian farms, and possibly on dinner plates.

A Silent Invasion: The Labelling Problem

Perhaps the most troubling issue with GMOs in Nigeria is the lack of clear labelling.

According to Section 43 of the NBMA Act, labelling is only required “as may be prescribed.” This gives the NBMA discretionary power to decide whether labelling is necessary. However, the NBMA Regulations of 2017 explicitly state that foods containing Genetically Modified (GM) ingredients must be labelled.

Additionally, the Pre-Packaged Food (Labelling) Regulations 2022 by the National Agency for Food and Drug Administration and Control (NAFDAC) also require the declaration of GMOs on the label.

Despite this regulation, there is currently no robust labelling framework for GM products in Nigeria. The NBMA Regulations set a 4 per cent GMO threshold for labelling, which means that foods containing less than 4 per cent GMOs do not require labelling.

In practice, this means that genetically modified beans, maize, or processed foods made from GM ingredients can be sold without informing consumers.

There are also concerns about the level of compliance with these labelling requirements in Nigeria. Some studies have indicated a lack of sufficient information on GMO labelling, highlighting the need for stronger enforcement and monitoring of labelling regulations to ensure consumer protection.

Compare this with the European Union, where labelling is mandatory for any food or feed containing more than 0.9% GM content. In Nigeria, people unknowingly consume GM foods, with no way of opting out.

Food vendors don’t know. Traders don’t know. Farmers often aren’t told the full story, and regulators are overwhelmed or complicit; the big question is, how then would the consumers know what they are eating?

Street Food, Supermarkets, and School Meals: The Unseen Web

In Nigeria, food flows through highly informal and complex channels. Beans bought at Mile 12 may end up as akara in a street corner in Enugu or moi-moi in a Lagos school meal program. Due to the lack of product traceability, it is impossible to tell whether that akara ball is made from traditional beans or genetically modified Bt-cowpea.

Supermarkets are no better. Imported processed foods, egg, cow-meat, cornflakes, oils, and snacks often contain GM soy or maize, yet labelling is inconsistent or nonexistent.

Some foreign products do carry labels, but Nigerian-made goods rarely do. In a 2022 study by the Nigerian Institute of Food Science and Technology (NIFST), over 60 per cent of tested supermarket items contained ingredients likely sourced from GM crops, yet fewer than 10 per cent were labelled.

Specifically, the study revealed that a large proportion of food products, particularly those made from maize, soy, and wheat, contained GM ingredients.

For example, one study detected GM sequences in 11 out of 15 samples tested, but only two were properly labelled. Another study showed that six out of 15 samples (40 per cent) were non-compliant with labelling guidelines, indicating that a substantial number of items were not labelled as containing GM ingredients.

This opacity undermines consumer rights and violates the principle of informed consent.

What Do Nigerians Think About GMOs?

A recent survey conducted by the University of Ibadan’s Department of Agricultural Extension in 2023 revealed a significant knowledge gap among Nigerians regarding genetically modified organisms (GMOs).

The survey found that a staggering 74 per cent of respondents had never even heard of GMOs, while 19 per cent had heard the term but couldn’t define it.

Only a tiny fraction, 7 per cent, could provide a clear explanation of what GMOs are and how they differ from traditional crops. This lack of awareness is alarming, especially considering the widespread presence of GMOs in the country’s food supply.

Despite the knowledge gap, the survey revealed a strong demand for transparency. When informed about GMOs, a whopping 82% of respondents expressed a desire to be told if the food they’re eating is genetically modified. This clear preference for transparency highlights the need for better education and labelling of GMO products in Nigeria.

What Does the Science Say?

The global scientific community remains divided on the long-term health and environmental implications of genetically modified organisms (GMOs). While numerous studies suggest that currently approved GM crops are safe for consumption, others caution that many of these studies are either too short-term, too narrow in scope, or influenced by the biotech industry itself.

Major institutions like the World Health Organisation (WHO), the Food and Agriculture Organisation (FAO), and the U.S. National Academy of Sciences have stated that GM foods approved through proper regulatory frameworks are unlikely to pose health risks. However, this is conditional on stringent and transparent safety assessments, something that is often lacking or inconsistently applied, especially in developing nations like Nigeria.

Speaking in an interview with THISDAY, Norwegian-Nigerian Scientist, Cynthia Uwalaka, noted that, “A key issue is the absence of long-term, independent research, particularly in African contexts where dietary patterns, environmental factors, and genetic diversity differ significantly from the regions where most GMO testing is done.

“In Nigeria, for instance, there is little to no publicly available data on how GM foods like Bt-cowpea interact with local health conditions, gut microbiota, or nutrient absorption.

“Most of the safety assessments used in Nigerian approvals rely on data generated by the developers of the crops themselves or from foreign studies, which may not account for region-specific variables such as exposure levels, cooking methods, or concurrent dietary deficiencies.

“There are ongoing concerns within the scientific community about the potential health risks associated with genetically modified foods. These include the possibility of triggering allergic reactions, particularly when foreign genes are introduced into common staples. For example, if a gene from a known allergen is used in the modification process, it could pose a risk to sensitive populations.

“There are also fears that the use of antibiotic resistance markers in some GMOs could contribute to the growing global problem of antibiotic resistance, a major public health threat. Additionally, some studies have raised questions about whether nutritional content in GM crops can change in unintended ways during genetic modification.

“Environmental risks also warrant closer scrutiny. One concern is the potential for gene transfer to non-target organisms, either through cross-pollination with wild relatives or horizontal gene transfer in the soil ecosystem.

“Such interactions could disrupt ecological balances, lead to the development of ‘superweeds’, or affect non-target insects and microorganisms that play critical roles in agriculture.

“For instance, if the gene that kills pests in Bt-cowpea inadvertently affects beneficial insects or promotes resistance in target pests, the technology could eventually backfire, making pest problems worse rather than better.

“Perhaps the most pressing issue in the Nigerian context is the complete absence of post-market surveillance systems. Once a genetically modified crop is approved and distributed, there is currently no mechanism in place to track its effects on human health or the environment; this means that even if negative consequences do emerge, such as increased allergic reactions, shifts.”

Corporate Influence and the Seed Monopoly Debate

While Bt-cowpea (SAMPEA 20-T) is often branded as a homegrown Nigerian innovation, the reality is more complex. Its development involved multiple partnerships with foreign biotech interests, notably the African Agricultural Technology Foundation (AATF), which receives funding from major biotechnology firms like Monsanto (now Bayer), Syngenta, and USAID.

This fusion of public research institutions and private multinational interests in Nigeria’s GMO sector has sparked fears about corporate capture of the seed system, a scenario where smallholder farmers lose control over what they plant, how they plant it, and how much they pay for it.

Why Seed Sovereignty Matters

For centuries, Nigerian farmers have saved, exchanged, and reused seeds from their harvests. This tradition is not just cultural; it is ‘economic’ and ‘ecological’. Local seed varieties are often well-adapted to specific microclimates and farming practices. However, GMOs change that.

Most GMO seeds, including Bt-cowpea, are patented or intellectual property-protected, meaning they come with restrictions on seed saving or replanting. While some developers claim that SAMPEA 20-T can be replanted “under certain conditions,” the fine print often includes licensing agreements that farmers must sign before purchasing seeds.

In countries like India, Argentina, and Brazil, such agreements have led to a few situations where farmers were sued for replanting patented seeds or forced to buy new seeds each planting season, creating economic dependency on biotech firms.

This ruling aligns with similar decisions in the US and Canada, which have determined that genetically engineered seeds are protected by domestic patent law.

The Cycle of Dependence

Here’s the deeper concern: according to Uwalaka, “Once GMO crops are widely adopted, traditional seed varieties often disappear due to cross-pollination, which contaminates native varieties; displacement, where high-yielding GMOs crowd out traditional seeds in markets and farms; and institutional neglect, where national seed banks and indigenous seed systems receive little or no funding.

“Over time, this leads to a monopoly of the seed supply, controlled by a handful of multinational corporations. Nigeria’s food system could then become structurally dependent on foreign companies, not just for seeds, but also for complementary inputs like chemical fertilisers and pesticides.

“This is not speculation; it has happened elsewhere. In the United States, just four companies control over 60 per cent of the seed market; in India, Monsanto’s Bt-cotton now accounts for over 90 per cent of all cotton planted, creating mass dependency and, in some regions, farmer debt crises.”

What Happens When Local Seeds Are Gone?

Uwalaka said, “If Nigeria allows its natural and indigenous seed systems to be eroded, the country faces existential food security risks.

“Foreign Dependency: Like crude oil imports or vaccine procurement, Nigeria could be forced to rely on external entities for its most basic need, food production. In the event of geopolitical tensions, economic sanctions, or corporate pricing disputes, access to seeds could be blocked or become unaffordable.

“Loss of Biodiversity: Indigenous seeds hold untapped genetic diversity essential for resilience against climate change, pests, and diseases; losing them means losing future options.

“Cultural Displacement: Seeds are not just genetic material; they are cultural heritage. Replacing them with engineered seeds erodes traditional farming knowledge and practices passed down for generations.

“Food System Fragility: A seed system reliant on annual purchases, precise inputs, and external expertise is more vulnerable to shocks than one rooted in local ecology and farmer autonomy.”

Alternative Pathways to Food Security in Nigeria

While genetically modified (GM) crops are often touted as the solution to food security, they’re not the only option. Nigeria’s agricultural system faces numerous challenges, including poor infrastructure, post-harvest losses, insecure land tenure, and limited government support. Addressing these systemic issues can lead to more sustainable, inclusive, and culturally acceptable outcomes than relying solely on GMOs.

Uwalaka added, “Fortunately, there are alternative pathways to food security that don’t involve GMOs. Low-tech, high-impact approaches like improved extension services, agroecological practices, post-harvest infrastructure, farmer cooperatives, and soil health programs can rapidly improve yields and reduce waste.

“Additionally, long-term strategies like investing in indigenous seed systems, promoting agroecological transition policies, and ensuring land reform and tenure security can build resilience and sustainability in Nigeria’s food systems.

“Ultimately, Nigeria doesn’t have to choose between starvation and GMOs. By prioritising ecological farming, public investment, farmer empowerment, and policy reform, the country can build a foundation of resilience, self-sufficiency, and democratic control over its food systems.

“This approach recognises that food security is not just about quantity, but also about quality, sovereignty, sustainability, and fairness.”

In conclusion, it is imperative that to achieve food security, Nigeria must prioritise seed sovereignty as a national priority. This entails investing in public seed banks and conserving indigenous seeds, regulating restrictive seed patents and licensing clauses, and supporting community-led seed systems and farmer-driven breeding initiatives.

Moreover, Nigeria must establish clear, enforceable policies on labelling, safety, and replanting rights for genetically modified (GM) seeds, ensuring that no GM seed enters the country without proper oversight. Ultimately, seed sovereignty is crucial, and food is power; whoever controls the seed controls the food system.

Hence, as Zainab stirs her pot of moi-moi in her modest kitchen, she deserves to know what exactly she’s feeding her children. Whether it is the product of centuries-old farming practices or 21st-century gene editing, that knowledge and choice to eat what should be hers by right, not hidden in regulatory fine print.

In the end, the question is not just ‘What’s in our food?’But ‘Who decides what we eat?’ Until Nigeria answers that question clearly, the dinner table will remain a place of uncertainty.

The post What’s in Your Food? appeared first on THISDAYLIVE.