VZCZCXRO7635
PP RUEHCHI RUEHDT RUEHHM RUEHNH
DE RUEHBK #0111/01 0140745
ZNR UUUUU ZZH
P 140745Z JAN 10
FM AMEMBASSY BANGKOK
TO RUEHC/SECSTATE WASHDC PRIORITY 9567
INFO RUEHCHI/AMCONSUL CHIANG MAI 7499
RUCNASE/ASEAN MEMBER COLLECTIVE

UNCLAS SECTION 01 OF 02 BANGKOK 000111 
 
Department for EAP/MLS DSmith; EEB/JBobo, MSzymanski; IIP/SEG 
GWeintraub 
 
SIPDIS 
 
E.O. 12958: N/A 
TAGS: EAGR ECON ETRD TBIO BEXP SENV KPAO TH
SUBJECT: U.S. Support for Biotechnology Development in Thailand; 
Still a Tough Row To Hoe 
 
REF: A) 09 STATE 122732 (Call For FY 2010 Funding Requests); B) 09 
BANGKOK 141 (FY 2009 Bangkok Proposal); C) 09 BANGKOK 2551 
(Ambassador Meets with Agriculture Minister) 
 
BANGKOK 00000111  001.2 OF 002 
 
 
¶1.  Summary and Comment: Agricultural biotechnology is widely 
accepted by the Thai scientific community, including Thai officials, 
but NGO and consumer groups continue to oppose biotech crops and 
foods (also known as genetically modified organisms or GMOs).  Given 
Thailand's importance as the world's number one rice exporter, the 
USG conducted several capacity building and outreach activities in 
2009 to increase awareness and understanding of this technology. 
Jack Bobo, Senior State Advisor for Biotechnology, met with industry 
leaders, academicians, and government officials in conferences and 
private meetings.  The USG also funded a Conference on Modern 
Biotechnology and Risk Communication to teach the skills to 
communicate with the public to decrease the fear and mistrust of 
biotechnology. 
 
¶2.  While outreach so far has been helpful, Post expects that 
continued efforts will be needed and climate change concerns could 
provide a useful way to engage on the issue.  Suggested outreach 
includes engagement with feed and export associations, an event on 
climate change and the role of agriculture, and meetings with 
private and public stakeholders to facilitate the development of a 
biotechnology risk communication strategy.  In addition, we should 
pursue knowledge building events on topics such as GLOBAL GAP, 
biotechnology with organic agriculture, how to commercialize biotech 
crops, and regulatory frameworks of biotech crops at international 
and national levels.  Post intends to request funding (in response 
to Ref A) to continue outreach in 2010 with an event, to be done in 
collaboration with FAS and USAID food security program office, that 
will connect biotechnology with Climate Change and Food Security for 
the Lower Mekong Initiative countries.  FAS also has proposed events 
to build upon the Conference on Modern Biotechnology and Risk 
Communication held in 2009. 
 
¶3. Thailand is an important country for USG biotech policy not only 
because of the positive role biotechnology can play in enhancing 
food security in the region, but because Thailand is generally 
supportive of U.S. positions in international fora such as the 
Biosafety Protocol to the Convention on Biological Diversity and in 
various committees of the Codex Alimentarius Commission, an 
international food safety standard setting body.  If Thailand 
becomes a producer of biotech crops it will be able to play a 
stronger role in promoting the technology in international meetings. 
 End Summary and Comment. 
 
Background 
---------- 
 
¶4.  Thailand has a thriving research program in agricultural 
biotechnology, but there is also a vocal opposition to genetically 
modified organisms.  In 2004, the RTG, under pressure from NGOs, 
banned agricultural biotech field trials in the country.  The Thai 
Cabinet revoked its ban on biotech field trials in December 2007, 
but there have been no approved field trials of agricultural biotech 
crops.  Because of vocal opposition, politicians have been hesitant 
to push for the use of biotechnology, and stakeholders in the 
government and private sector report that requirements are 
restrictive and vague.  In addition, the requisite public hearings 
prior to field trials give anti-biotech NGOs a strong platform. 
 
¶5.  As the world's number one rice exporter and one of the region's 
top agricultural exporters, Thailand is a key nation for the 
region's food security and projected increases in the severity of 
droughts and floods are a major risk.  Advances in agricultural 
technology, including biotechnology, are one possible answer to such 
threats to food production, but the public needs to accept the 
technology before it can be fully utilized.  For example, insect 
pests and viral diseases have devastated much of the country's 
traditional production of papaya and cotton.  Thailand's area 
planted in cotton went from over 150,000 hectares to recently less 
than 11,200 hectares.  A 2007 report done by the Biotechnology 
Alliance Association (BAA), a Thai biotechnology advocacy group, 
estimated that Thailand loses US $3-7 million per year from not 
allowing genetically modified papaya (based on GM papaya's average 
yields of 74 tons/hectares against the current 18 tons/hectare 
derived from non-GM papaya varieties).  Biotech cotton would have a 
similar beneficial economic impact on cotton production in the 
country. 
 
Outreach by the Senior Advisor for Biotechnology 
--------------------------------------------- --- 
 
¶6.  Jack Bobo, Senior State Department Advisor for Biotechnology, 
visited Thailand from September 24 to October 4.  He participated in 
the "International Conference on Knowledge Management in 
Agricultural Biotechnology: the Asian Experience," where he 
 
BANGKOK 00000111  002.2 OF 002 
 
 
presented his paper "Addressing Global Challenges: the Role of 
Agricultural Biotechnology and Implications for Knowledge 
Management"; moderated an APEC steering committee meeting for the 
High Level Policy Dialogue on AgBiotech; participated in a 
roundtable discussion on the topic of biotechnology and its role in 
food security and global warming; and had meetings with industry 
leaders, academicians, and government officials involved in the 
biotech sector in Thailand.  Accompanied by FAS officers, Mr. Bobo 
met with representatives from Pioneer, Monsanto, C.P. Group, 
Kasetsart University, the National Center for Genetic Engineering 
and Biotechnology, and the Thai Food and Drug Administration. 
Suggestions for future outreach received by Mr. Bobo during these 
meetings included events on climate change and the role of 
agriculture, meetings with private and public stakeholders to 
facilitate the development of appropriate communication strategies, 
and engagement with Thailand's feed and export associations. 
 
Modern Biotechnology and Risk Communication Conference 
--------------------------------------------- --------- 
 
¶7.  The Conference "Modern Biotechnology and Risk Communication" was 
held on October 5 and 6 in Bangkok.  It was organized by the U.S. 
Department of Agriculture (USDA), the Department of State (using 
DOS/EEB outreach funds), Asia BioBusiness, Thailand's National 
Center for Genetic Engineering and Biotechnology (BIOTEC), and the 
Food Science and Technology Association of Thailand (FOSTAT). 
Ambassador Eric John and Darunee Edwards, President of FOSTAT, 
opened the conference.  They emphasized the important role of 
agriculture biotechnology in enhancing agriculture production and 
food security.  DOS/ECA speaker program participant Dr. James 
Maryanski then discussed standards for food safety assessment and 
basic principles of communicating with the public.  Dr. Andrew 
Powell of Asia BioBusiness and Dr. Marichel Navarro of the 
International Service for the Acquisition of Agri-biotech 
Applications (ISAAA) gave presentations as well. 
 
¶8.  Following the speakers, a risk communication workshop presented 
basic elements of risk communication and how these elements could be 
applied to communicate with the public about biotech foods.  The 
workshop included interactive exercises for participants to develop 
an understanding of and apply principles of risk communication in 
different circumstances.  Attendees provided very positive feedback 
and suggested topics for future events - to include GLOBAL GAP, 
biotechnology with organic agriculture, how to commercialize GM 
crops, and regulatory frameworks of biotech crops at international 
and national levels.  Media coverage of the event was 
straightforward and without negative commentary. 
 
JOHN