Technology, governance and place: situating biotechnology in Kenya

Abstract

Following the pioneering work of several Latin American anthropologists, reconnecting to the idea of place and examining networked strategies of marginalised actors are explored as useful approaches to analyse the governance of biotechnology in an African context. Such place-based approaches provide an opportunity to marry more traditional understandings of macro levels of governance with the politics of how local institutions assign needs, build relationships and manage change. The argument is illustrated via case studies of several tissue culture banana projects in Kenya. The cases show that a place-based approach to governance can be both empirically pragmatic and theoretically useful by providing a way to focus on the location of decision-making, and by putting politics and power differentials between actors more firmly within governance frameworks.

International collaboration in global environmental research: a comparison of the International Geosphere Biosphere Program and the International Hydrological Program

“…Although we have examined only two major programs, our conclusions illustrate the usefulness of comparing GEC programs; it is likely that a more comprehensive analysis that includes other GEC programs would improve our understanding of the mechanisms required to effectively coordinate global research activities in cumulative GEC fields. Further insights may be possible by examining programs in fields outside GEC, such as programs in agricultural biotechnology (World Bank, 2003;Harsh and Smith, 2007). While these comparisons are outside the scope of this paper, we believe that they are worthy of further study.…”

Inventing Makhathini: Creating a prototype for the dissemination of genetically modified crops into Africa

“…T.J. Buthelezi actively assisted in all phases of this research project. contribute to the relative success of agricultural biotechnology (Harsh and Smith, 2007). This omission is a crucial part of the process of technological storytelling: it serves to perpetuate the myth of success, thereby extending the significance and promise of this technological intervention (Mosse, 2005).…”

“…As Harsh and Smith (2007) emphasize, the contentious debate over the potential GM technology can offer to African farmers is bereft of place-based analyses that seek to understand how culturally and ecologically embedded variables contribute to the relative success of agricultural biotechnology. This section highlights the geographical and institutional factors that underpinned Bt cotton's takeoff in Makhathini, in an attempt to re-emphasize the structural factors that were critical to its success.…”

“…Each failed to deliver on this promise. Efforts to promote Bt cotton on the Makhathini Flats remain steeped in the legacies of earlier failures: the bias in favor of large-scale, monoculture agricultural interventions, the recasting of social and political problems as technical ones that can be fixed by rational planning and expert knowledge, the propensity for scientific research that studies ecological variables in isolation rather than as an interaction (Harsh and Smith, 2007;Shah, 2008;Binimelis et al, 2009). The history of cotton in Makhathini is, in Allan Isaacman's terms, a story of historical amnesia: each new technological intervention promised to revolutionize production, while furthering the rationale for ignoring previous histories of failed interventions.…”

Experts to the rescue? An analysis of the role of experts in biotechnology regulation in Kenya

“…In Kenya for example, the process has been controversial occasioned by conflicts between interests of different actors (Harsh, 2005). This complicates the context under which biotechnology is expected to contribute to development based on the politics experienced at domestic level, and yet linked to international politics (Harsh and Smith, 2007).…”