She Came, She Saw, She Sowed: Re-negotiating Gender-Responsive Priorities for Effective Development of Agricultural Biotechnology in Sub-Saharan Africa

Ezezika, Obidimma; Deadman, Jennifer; Daar, Abdallah S.

doi:10.1007/s10806-012-9396-9

Cited by 10 publications

(9 citation statements)

References 23 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Higher yields and/or reduced pesticide use can then have secondary social impacts such as improved household finances, better labour conditions and health improvements. Looking specifically at studies of Bt cotton relying on own farm-level data, there were 23 such studies in the dataset [53,66,67,70,76,77,[81][82][83][84][85][86][87][93][94][95][96][97][98][99][100][101][102]. The majority (12) were from India, followed by South Africa (5), Argentina (2), Burkina Faso (2), Mexico (1) and Australia (1) as the only country representing the Global North.…”

Section: The Example Of Bt Cottonmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…(With regard to the countries represented in these studies, it should be noted that Pechlaner and Otero [70] presented data from three countries, Canada, Mexico and the USA, but Bt cotton was only mentioned for Mexico and therefore only Mexico is mentioned here. In the overall classification of studies, Ezezika et al [93] was classified as not providing data from a specific country, but rather a region (sub-Saharan Africa). Thus when numbers for the whole dataset are presented, this study is included as not focusing on a specific country.…”

Section: The Example Of Bt Cottonmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Thus when numbers for the whole dataset are presented, this study is included as not focusing on a specific country. However, with regard to Bt cotton, Ezezika et al [93] used interviews made in Burkina Faso and is therefore counted here as providing data on Bt cotton from Burkina Faso. As in the total dataset, economic impacts were most frequently addressed (20/23 studies), followed by distributional impacts (12), wellbeing and access (7) and cultural heritage (2).…”

Section: The Example Of Bt Cottonmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Russell [85] showed how Australian farmers, although largely positive to the environmental benefits of Bt cotton, have expressed concerns about the monopolistic seed industry and the risks this poses through reduced variety in supply and pricing of GM products [85]. Based on evidence from Burkina Faso, Ezesika et al [93] concluded that, as women are excluded from post-harvest sales of Bt cotton, they have limited possibilities to control the benefits of increased harvests. In summary, the accumulated evidence on Bt cotton indicates that a key reason why economic distribution and access impacts on the ground vary with context is that outcomes on the ground are largely affected by different political and regulatory contexts.…”

Section: The Example Of Bt Cottonmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Social Impacts of GM Crops in Agriculture: A Systematic Literature Review

et al. 2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

It has recently been argued that the fragmented knowledge on the social impacts of genetically modified (GM) crops is contributing to the polarised debate on the matter. This paper addresses this issue by systematically reviewing 99 peer-reviewed journal articles published since 2004 on the social impacts of GM crops in agriculture; summarising current knowledge, and identifying research gaps. Economic impact studies currently dominate the literature and mainly report that GM crops provide economic benefits for farmers. Other social impacts are less well studied, but present a more complex picture. Studies on access to and benefits of GM crops show that these vary significantly depending on the political and regulatory setting. Substantial evidence indicates that intellectual property rights (IPR) and the private industry's dominance limit the access and utility of available GM crops to many farmers. Wellbeing is frequently discussed in the literature, but rarely investigated empirically. Existing evidence is contradictory and inconclusive. Impact studies from the Global North are virtually non-existent. Moreover, OPEN ACCESSSustainability 2015, 7 8599 two-thirds of publications are based on previously published empirical evidence, indicating a need for new empirical investigations into the social impacts of GM crops in agriculture.

show abstract

Section: The Example Of Bt Cottonmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: The Example Of Bt Cottonmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: The Example Of Bt Cottonmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: The Example Of Bt Cottonmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Social Impacts of GM Crops in Agriculture: A Systematic Literature Review

et al. 2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…A comparison of the issues discussed in the Africa and Europe literature indicated more engagement in the former with how different policies affect farmers and how policy affects different types of farmers differently [7,49,62,63], whereas more of the Europe literature broadly discusses effects of policy on overall trade between the EU and countries outside the EU [55,56,58,64]. In both bodies of literature, attention is paid to the differences between and the effects of US and EU policies [30,33,53,54,59,60,[65][66][67][68][69].…”

Section: Policy and Market Issues Researched In Africa And Europementioning

confidence: 99%

Social Science Studies on European and African Agriculture Compared: Bringing Together Different Strands of Academic Debate on GM Crops

Fischer

Eriksson

2016

Sustainability

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study explored the social science-orientated literature on genetically modified (GM) crops in Europe and compared it with the corresponding literature on GM crops in African contexts, in order to determine the nature and extent of north-south cross-fertilisation in the literature. A total of 1625 papers on GM crops and agriculture falling within the 'social science and humanities' subject area in the Scopus abstract and citation database of peer-reviewed literature were analysed for major trends relating to geographical areas. More detailed analysis was performed on papers discussing African (56 papers) and European (127 papers) contexts. The analysis revealed that studies on policy and politics were common in both strands of the literature, frequently focusing on effects of the relatively restrictive European Union regulations on GM crops. There were also clear differences, however. For example, papers focusing on Africa frequently examined farm-level impacts and production, while this theme was almost non-existent in the Europe literature. It focused instead on policy impacts on trade and consumer attitudes to GM products. The lack of farm-level studies and of empirical studies in general in the European literature indicates a need for empirical research on GM crops in European farming. Social science research on GM crop production in Europe could draw lessons from the African literature.

show abstract