<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" version="2.0">
<channel>
<title>GENETICALLY MODIFIED FOODS AND IMPLICATIONS ON TRADITIONAL CROPS AND HEALTH SECURITY IN NIGERIA</title>
<link>http://hdl.handle.net/123456789/1778</link>
<description/>
<pubDate>Mon, 06 Apr 2026 06:12:11 GMT</pubDate>
<dc:date>2026-04-06T06:12:11Z</dc:date>
<item>
<title>GENETICALLY MODIFIED FOODS AND IMPLICATIONS ON TRADITIONAL CROPS AND HEALTH SECURITY IN NIGERIA</title>
<link>http://hdl.handle.net/123456789/1779</link>
<description>GENETICALLY MODIFIED FOODS AND IMPLICATIONS ON TRADITIONAL CROPS AND HEALTH SECURITY IN NIGERIA
GBARADA, Olugbenga
Genetically Modified Food (GMF) is an invention targeted at ensuring food security, but with&#13;
significant environmental and health implications. There were controversies associated with&#13;
its adoption in Nigeria. These included pesticide resistance, biodiversity and ownership of&#13;
intellectual property rights. Studies have focused on these issues but with limited&#13;
consideration for their implications on health and traditional crops in the local environment.&#13;
The study therefore, examined the adoption of GMF and its implications for traditional crops&#13;
and health security in Nigeria.&#13;
Burton’s Human Needs Theory served as a framework while cross-sectional survey design&#13;
was used. Data were derived from both primary and secondary sources using purposive&#13;
sampling techniques. A questionnaire with themes that included reasons, perceptions of&#13;
stakeholders, controversies, implications and concerns for GMF in Nigeria was used to collect&#13;
data from 420 stratified respondents from the six geopolitical zones: academia (135),&#13;
regulatory bodies (123), research institutes (80), farmers (19) and civil society organisations&#13;
working on the health and environment (63). Twenty-two in-depth interviews (IDIs) were&#13;
conducted with stakeholders in academia (5), regulatory bodies (2), research institutes (9),&#13;
farmers (2) and civil society organisations working on the health and environment (4).&#13;
Quantitative data were analysed using descriptive statistics and factor analysis at p ≤ 0.05,&#13;
while qualitative data were content analysed.&#13;
The regulatory bodies supported the adoption and cultivation of GMF in Nigeria while the&#13;
members of civil society organisations working on the health and environment opposed it.&#13;
Pesticide resistance and economic diversification were among the reasons for adopting GMF&#13;
in Nigeria. The adoption of GMF in Nigeria improved resistance to pests and diseases&#13;
(92.0%), led to a reduction in yield deficits (91.0%), improved nutritional quality (87.0%) and&#13;
increased crop varieties (85.0). The controversies about GMF included genetic pollution of&#13;
non-GMO plants (65.7%), health risk (61.4%), the risk to the environment (58.3%), the&#13;
passage of a bio-safety bill to regulate GMF cultivation and sales (55.0%), suspicious&#13;
scientific research and publications (54.3%). The high cost of GMF seeds and products can&#13;
lead farmers into debt (52.4%) and food insecurity in Nigeria (50.0%). The individual factor&#13;
loading indicated escape of modified crops from farms (0.78&gt;0.5), gene flow (0.77&gt;0.5) and&#13;
horizontal gene transfer (0.74&gt;0.5) as significant environmental issues capable of decimating&#13;
traditional crops. It also indicated greenhouse gas emission (0.77&gt;0.5), toxicity (0.74&gt;0.5)&#13;
and adverse nutritional changes (0.71&gt;0.5) as potent risks to health security.&#13;
The adoption of GMF has checked the problems of pests and diseases, reduced yield deficits,&#13;
increased crop varieties and improved nutritional quality. Nonetheless, to achieve an&#13;
acceptable GMF regime in the country, stakeholders should provide measures to avoid genetic&#13;
pollution. An indigenous intelligence framework of institutional collaboration should be put&#13;
in place and stakeholders should be carried along in biosafety management to ensure the longterm protection of traditional crops and health security.
</description>
<pubDate>Wed, 01 Sep 2021 00:00:00 GMT</pubDate>
<guid isPermaLink="false">http://hdl.handle.net/123456789/1779</guid>
<dc:date>2021-09-01T00:00:00Z</dc:date>
</item>
</channel>
</rss>
