By Verenardo Meeme
August 28, 2025
(Lusaka, Zambia) Kenya has lost an estimated US$157 million over the past five years due to delays in adopting three genetically modified (GM) crops—Bt maize, Bt cotton, and a late blight disease-resistant potato—according to new research presented at the Africa Biennial Biosciences Communication (ABBC) symposium in Lusaka, Zambia.
The study, co-authored by African and international scientists, highlights the economic, social and environmental toll of postponing technologies designed to improve food security, farmer incomes, and climate resilience.
Delays with costly consequences
“These GM crops are intended to benefit Kenya’s smallholders, who represent 70% of the maize farmers and 98% of the potato farmers,” said Vitumbiko Chinoko, Project Manager of the Open Forum on Agricultural Biotechnology (OFAB) at AATF and a co-author of the report.
“This research documents their value to Kenya—and the high cost of delaying them,” Chinoko noted.
The report found that postponing the rollout of insect-resistant Bt maize alone cost Kenyan farmers and consumers US$67 million, mostly due to the higher pesticide use and reduced yields associated with conventional varieties.
Farmers also lost the opportunity to produce an additional 194,000 tonnes of maize—equivalent to a quarter of the maize Kenya imported in 2022.
Bt cotton delays cost farmers and consumers US$1.2 million, while a five-year delay in rolling out disease-resistant GM potato would cost Kenyan farmers and consumers $89 million.
If the block against GM potato is lifted, the crop is expected to generate US$247 million in combined benefits for farmers and consumers over the next 30 years.
The study estimates that Bt maize, Bt cotton, and GM potato together could generate US$467 million in benefits over the next 30 years through higher productivity, reduced pesticide costs, and stronger food security.
Environmental and social costs of delay
The research also underscored the environmental cost of delay. Adoption of Bt maize and Bt cotton could have reduced Kenya’s carbon dioxide emissions by up to 0.23–0.72 million tons of carbon dioxide emissions per year, equivalent to nearly 1% of the country’s total emissions in 2020. Reduced pesticide use, lower production costs, and less pressure on forests for new farmland were among the wider benefits identified with growing GM crops.
“One of the avoidable costs we should be looking at is the dignity of people when they are forced to rely on imported food that they could grow themselves,” Chinoko observed.
“The money spent on food imports could be channeled into other sectors of the economy. That’s the true social cost of delayed adoption,” he added
Global comparisons
As Africa confronts growing food insecurity and climate risks, the findings sharpen a wider policy debate: how to balance regulatory caution with the urgent need to equip farmers with science-driven tools to secure their livelihoods and feed their nations.
Kenya’s timeline for developing and commercialising GM crops—estimated at 12–15 years—is significantly longer than other regions. By comparison, it takes 7–8 years in Argentina, 5–7 years in the US, and 8–10 years in Brazil.
Experts at the ABBC symposium warned that such delays deny farmers timely access to innovations that could boost resilience against climate shocks and food insecurity.
A call for science-based policy frameworks
The GM crop report, developed in collaboration with Boyce Thompson Institute, the Alliance for Science, AATF, ISAAA AfriCenter, and the International Potato Center, calls for policies that accelerate crop approval processes while building public trust through transparency and effective communication.
“Global evidence demonstrates that GM crops, with their superior pest and disease resistance, can significantly boost yields and incomes,” Chinoko said. “Kenya’s farmers and consumers deserve to reap those benefits.”
