The moratorium bills on genetically engineered taro and coffee undermine development of Hawai'i's science and technology industries and put at risk their high-paying technical jobs. The bills are needless for a number of reasons.

The University of Hawai'i agreed more than a year ago that genetic engineering research on Hawaiian taro would not proceed until discussions with the Hawaiian community are completed. UH has a similar agreement with the Kona coffee growers, in which field testing of genetic engineering research will not be conducted until discussions with them are completed.

Therefore, it puzzles us why legislation is needed at all — unless it is an attempt to hijack legitimate cultural concerns and the concerns of some coffee growers in the service of a broader philosophic and anti-scientific agenda.

If we truly want to expand Hawai'i's economy beyond a service/tourism industry, we must embrace the latest in responsible science and technology. That is where graduates of our local colleges and universities will find opportunities that help them find well-paying jobs in Hawai'i.

Yet, the prospect for success is in jeopardy. Should the anti-biotech taro and coffee measures become law, Hawai'i will be the first state in the nation to ban a genetically engineered crop.

This would make us the nation's leader in anti-science public policy, which would send a chilling message to potential investors. Such investments are critical to the future of Hawai'i because they are tied to the economic aspirations we all have for our state.

Crop biotechnology helps reduce or eliminate the application of crop protection chemicals and increases the productivity of our farmlands and forests. New crops currently in development will help improve nutrition and human health. Those who adopt a zero tolerance attitude toward genetic modification threaten to deny everyone these benefits by playing on fear of the unknown and fear of change. More than 30 regulatory agencies in 22 countries, plus prominent international scientific authorities, have concluded that biotech crops are as safe as conventional crops.

Agricultural biotechnology enables researchers to target specific plant traits and develop solutions to agricultural challenges more quickly and more precisely than conventional techniques —solutions that otherwise might not be possible.

In the case of taro, the need for such efficiencies could not be more pressing. A wide variety of pests has led the number of named Hawaiian varieties to decline from more than 400 in the early 1900s to fewer than 60 today. To prevent further loss, taro could benefit from the use of all plant-breeding technologies, including biotechnology.

The same is true for our coffee crops, which are becoming infested with root knot nematode. The Hawai'i Coffee Growers Association is so concerned about it that they testified against the proposed moratorium on field testing of biotech coffee. They are the only statewide organization representing growers, who together farm Hawaiian-grown coffee on approximately 5,000 acres. Since the HCGA doesn't want a moratorium, why would we force it upon them?

Crop biotechnology could also potentially benefit Hawai'i's native wiliwili trees, which last year were devastated by attacks from gall wasps, and banana crops under attack from banana bunchy top virus.

Naysayers need only look to our papaya industry, which was devastated during the 1980s because of attack from papaya ringspot virus. Were it not for the introduction of the Rainbow papaya, which was genetically engineered to resist the virus, we would not have a viable papaya industry today.

The potential applications seem endless. Therefore, at what point do we draw the line against using biotechnology to solve pressing problems in our environment?

The political process should not be misused in this way. Instead, the Hawai'i Crop Improvement Association believes in laulima (working together). Solutions for the future of taro and coffee in Hawai'i should be found — not in legislation but through discussion among the respective communities affected, the University of Hawai'i College of Tropical Agriculture and Human Resources, farmers and others.

The challenge for such discussions is to provide for all our needs in ways that reduce the negative impact on the environment while also being culturally and socially acceptable as well as technically and economically feasible. Compromise and cooperation among the native Hawaiian community, government, industry and academia is essential for coexistence, which is the key to sustainability.

Equally important is the need to safeguard the development of a viable science and technology industry in Hawai'i as a means to ensure new and better opportunities for generations to come.

Meanwhile, farmers will always be able to plant conventional varieties of taro and coffee. And, they should always have the right to choose their preferred growing methods, which could include the tools of biotechnology as one way to improve plant varieties and ensure sustainability among threatened crops.

Adolph Helm is president-elect of Hawai'i Crop Improvement Association and project manager for Dow Agro-Science research site on Moloka'i. He wrote this commentary for The Advertiser.