The topic of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) is a great target for science communication because public attitudes have largely been shaped by deliberate misinformation, and the research suggests that those attitudes can change in response to more accurate information. It is the topic where the disconnect between scientists and the public is the greatest, and it is the most amenable to change.

The misinformation comes in several forms, and one of those forms is the umbrella claim that GMOs have been bad for farmers in various ways. But this is not true, which is why I have often said that people who believe the misinformation should talk to farmers. The idea is that the false claims against GMOs are largely based on a fundamental misunderstanding of how modern farming works.

There is another issue here, which falls under another anti-GMO strategy – blaming GMOs for any perceived negative aspects of the economics of farming. Like in many industries, farm sizes have grown, and small family farms (analogous to mom-and-pop stores) have given way to large corporate owned agricultural conglomerates. This is largely due to consolidation, which has been happening for over a century (long before GMOs). It happens because larger farms have an economy of scale – they can afford more expensive high technology farm equipment. They can spread out their risk more. They are more productive. And when a small farm owner retires without a family to leave it to, they tend to consolidate with a larger farm. Also, government subsidies tend to favor larger farms.

Some small family farms have found a business model that works, and they do well. We have many local farms where I live, who do agricultural events, pick your own, pumpkin picking, sell many heirloom vegetables, sell wine, have a corn maze, and do other things to stay profitable.

You will notice that none of this has anything to do with GMOs. But let’s get back to the first strategy and see why it is flawed and can be fixed by talking to a farmer.

One anti-GMO claim is that farmers don’t like to have to buy their seeds from big companies. They would rather save their seeds to plant the next year. There are two reasons why this argument fails as an anti-GMO argument. One is that farmers have been buying their seeds for decades, again – long before GMOs came on the scene. In the 1990s (before GMOs) greater than 90% of all seeds planted in developed countries were hybrids, and hybrid seeds are patented and owned by seed companies. GMOs literally changed nothing. Also, you cannot replant hybrid seeds because the hybrid traits do not breed through. They are worthless for replanting.

Further, farmers generally don’t want to save their seeds, store them over winter, keeping them dry and vermin-free. This is a lot of work. It’s easier just to buy fresh seeds each season. Again, there will be exceptions for some crops and some farmers, but they can still do that if they wish. They can preserve their heirloom crops in this way, no one is stopping them.

Another claim is that GMOs hurt farmers, because they are expensive. But farmers buy GMOs because they are more profitable. In a 2022 study:

Over the period 1996 to 2020, the economic benefits have been significant with farm incomes for those using the technology having increased by $261.3 billion US dollars. This equates to an average farm income gain across all GM crops grown in this period of about $112/hectare.

So the narrative that farmers are forced to buy GMO seeds they don’t want, it costs them money, and they are prevented from saving and replanting seeds is completely false. A basic understanding of the farming industry would correct this false narrative – i.e., talk to an actual farmer. Further, use of some GMO crops makes farming outcomes more predictable, which is critical to farmers. They are less likely to lose their crop to pests or drought. GMOs make it easier to do no-til farming, and to use less pesticide, which saves on labor.

In terms of the effect of GMOs on small-scale farmers specifically:

The most significant advantages of GM crops include being independent to farm size, environment protection, improvement of occupational health issues, and the potential of bio-fortified crops to reduce malnutrition. Challenges faced by small-scale farmers for adoption of GM crops comprise availability and accessibility of GM crop seeds, seed dissemination and price, and the lack of adequate information.

Like all technologies, smaller farms are less able to afford them and reap their benefits. Of course, this is no reason to ban the technology (there is no discussion of banning other high-tech agricultural technology because it is difficult for small-scale farmers to afford). Again, they have to find a business model that works for their scale. There are challenges for any small business to compete with the big boys.

Finally, there is one thing that some farmers worry about when it comes to GMOs – they can be controversial. But this is a circular argument – they are controversial because they are controversial. This is precisely the strategy of the anti-GMO lobby – demonize GMOs and make them controversial so that the controversy becomes a negative unto itself.

We can talk about the economics of farming, how to protect small farmers, and we can have this discussion in the context of business as a whole. Again – the trend toward consolidation is a general trend across most industries for reasons generic to business, capitalism, and scale. But let’s remove the fake arguments from the GMO discussion. This is not about forcing farmers to buy GMO seeds – they do so voluntarily because they are profitable. Let’s also not pretend that most farmers want to save their seeds but can’t. This is simply not a good business model, and most farmers have abandoned the practice of saving seeds long before GMOs entered the scene. Also, most seeds were patented long before GMO technology.

Most farmers recognize that GMO technology is simply an extension of breeding and cultivation and has resulted in some extremely useful cultivars, with more to come. Abandoning GMOs will hurt farmers, will reduce food production, and will hurt the environment.