R 021530Z APR 09
FM AMEMBASSY BUDAPEST
TO AMEMBASSY BERLIN 
DEPT OF AGRICULTURE WASHDC
SECSTATE WASHDC 4060

UNCLAS BUDAPEST 000267 
 
 
STATE FOR EB/TPP/BTT JACK BOBO, JFINN 
USDA FOR FAS EPORTER, EJONES, DYOUNG, SNENON, GLAIDIG 
 
E.O. 12958: N/A 
TAGS: EAGR ECON ETRD TBIO KPAO
 
SUBJECT:  A POSITIVE STEP FOR BIOTECH ACCEPTANCE IN HUNGARY 
 
REF: STATE 52602, STATE 160639 
 
¶1.  Summary. In keeping with the U.S. Government's strategy to 
publicize the benefits of agricultural biotechnology and take 
advantage of the favorable WTO ruling on agbiotech, Mission Hungary 
conducted outreach activities primarily focused on American farmers 
experience with biotech crops.  This program was the third in a 
series, since fall 2008, in Hungary.  End summary. 
 
¶2. In March 2009, two farmers from the State of Iowa conducted a 
variety of outreach activities throughout Hungary as part of the 
regional effort to build interest and confidence in biotech crops in 
the EU. The program highlighted the practical experiences American 
farmers have had with biotech crops (corn and soybeans), their 
reasons for planting biotech crops, and the advantages biotech crops 
provide to their farms and to the environment.  The outreach program 
included meetings with government and business representatives, 
agricultural cooperatives, farmers and students. 
 
¶3. It also follows up on a biotech-related visit by a group of 
Hungarian Agricultural Parliamentarians to the United States in 
2008, as well as a luncheon held by Ambassador Foley with Hungary's 
Parliamentary Agricultural Committee Members.  Questions regarding 
technological advantages and potential benefits of the next 
generation of biotech seeds were of primary interest. 
 
¶4.  In addition to conducting a courtesy visit with Ambassador Foley 
in the U.S. Mission, the 2-member team held separate roundtable 
discussions with the Grain Producers Association (18 leading grain 
producers in Hungary), and a group consisting of the Hungarian Seed 
Association, the Scientific Deputy Director of the Agricultural 
Research Institute of the Hungarian Academy of Sciences staff from 
the U.S. Mission (10 participants).    Representatives from 
Hungary's Ministry of Agriculture were invited, but did not attend. 
(Comment:  At the time of the outreach visit, the EU was voting for 
the lifting of Austria and Hungary's ban on the planting of biotech 
plants.  Given the sensitivity of the issue, Emboffs were told by 
contacts that Ministry representatives were not attending the 
discussion.  End Comment).  The team also held meetings with the 
President and staff of KITE, a Hungarian agricultural service and 
trade corporation (7 participants).  The team also traveled to the 
northeast region of Hungary and engaged in a discussion with 
students at the University of Debrecen (approximately 60 
participants).  The program was arranged in close cooperation with 
the U.S. Mission in Hungary as well as agriculture and university 
contacts. 
 
¶5.  The team provided overhead presentations at all of the scheduled 
events and allowed extensive time for discussions.  They offered 
insightful explanations into how American farmers viewed 
biotechnology.  The most important points of the presentations were 
discussions about the benefits to crop management and the 
environment, as well as the introduction of new biotech varieties 
planned for commercial production.  In addition, the team presented 
the advantages biotechnology provides to farmers in the United 
States in regards to reaching its energy objectives. 
 
¶6.  Most of the outreach discussions focused on the skepticism 
Hungarian farmers had about biotechnology, primarily because of the 
relatively small size of Hungarian farms which average 3-4 hectares 
(7-9 acres).  Some Hungarian farmers asserted that they already 
produced surplus yields, which they exported to a protected EU 
market.  Therefore, they didn't need biotechnology.  They argued 
that increasing yields through biotech would only lead to a much 
bigger problem with overproduction and result in lower prices. 
However, when the team presented information about the expected 
commercial release of drought resistance biotech corn varieties, the 
tone of the Hungarian farmers changed and suddenly they showed 
significant interest.  The Hungarian farmers indicated that they 
rely predominately on rain to irrigate their crops and that they 
have also experienced extremely hot and dry summers in the past 
several years. Thus, a drought resistant biotech corn variety would 
certainly be useful in Hungary. 
 
¶7.  One criticism often heard in the discussions was the amount of 
biotech misinformation that is prevalent in the public.  According 
to participants, most of the information available to Hungarians is 
about the negative and unscientific side-effects of biotechnology 
such as killing of bees and humans.  Some even claim that one of the 
reasons the United States entered the Balkan war was to spread the 
root worm in the region.  The team learned that a lot of the 
misinformation is being driven by politicians and non-governmental 
organizations, who in the words of one participant stated, "these 
politicians do not know what they are talking about when it comes to 
GMOs, but instead they see it as voting mathematics for the next 
election." 
 
¶8.  One important result of the outreach program was the desire for 
more information.  Many of the outreach participants were surprised 
to hear about the benefits biotechnology provided to American 
farmers.  On the whole, participants appreciated the information 
presented by the team.  In feedback discussions with participants 
and organizers, the team learned that both speakers were viewed as 
highly credible.  Participants were particularly interested in 
hearing more about the next generation of biotech varieties like the 
drought resistant biotech corn and the advantages it could provide 
to Hungarian farmers.  Furthermore, because of the gas energy 
problems Hungary experienced with Ukraine and Russia earlier in the 
winter, farmers were excited to hear about the successful use of 
biotech corn in producing renewable forms of energy such as 
bio-ethanol. 
 
¶9.  The visit of the Biotech Team occurred at a sensitive time as 
the EU was in the process of voting to lift Austria's and Hungary's 
ban on planting biotech crops.  Because of this sensitivity, Mission 
Hungary carefully designed the activities to be low-key events to 
prevent any public backlash against the team's visit. Fortunately, 
there were no confrontations with anti-biotech supporters. 
 
¶10.  The Biotech Outreach Team would like to express its continued 
appreciation to the Department of State's Office of Agriculture, 
Biotechnology and Textile Trade Affairs and to the Office of 
Scientific and Technical Affairs and Office of Capacity Building and 
Development for their contributions and support. 
 
¶11.  Comment:  While skepticism about biotechnology in Hungary 
remains strong, continuing such outreach programs, particularly in 
challenging misinformation circulated by anti-biotech groups can be 
an effective tool.  In a country where green biotechnology doesn't 
really have a positive image, Mission Hungary believes that the 
biotech outreach program is making inroads.  As the Deputy Director 
of the Hungary's Grain Producers' Association stated, "in my 
opinion, it was successful." 
 
LEVINE