The Theory and Practice of Genetically Engineered Crops and Agricultural Sustainability

Ervin, David E.; Glenna, Leland; Jussaume, Raymond A.

doi:10.3390/su3060847

Cited by 19 publications

(7 citation statements)

References 59 publications

(70 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…There is intense discussion in the research community and society at large on whether use of genetically modified (GM) crops in agriculture can contribute to sustainable development [1][2][3]. Previous discussions and evaluations of sustainability in general [4][5][6] and of agricultural practices [7] have been dominated by the ecological dimension, whereas the social aspects of sustainability have been rather neglected.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

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: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

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

et al. 2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The same holds at the company level: the quest for short-term, fast profitability should give way to more sustainable approaches, with the development of more worthwhile GMOs. This is also the case for the social, political, and other economic aspects of these technologies [80,81], which have been only skimmed here. A more sustainable development implies better governance of this innovation: the way in which it is used, which depends on the overall economic system, is probably more at stake than the technological innovation itself.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Herbicide-tolerant Transgenic Soybean over 15 Years of Cultivation: Pesticide Use, Weed Resistance, and Some Economic Issues. The Case of the USA

Bonny

2011

Sustainability

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Genetically modified (GM) herbicide-tolerant (HT) crops have been largely adopted where they have been authorized. Nevertheless, they are fiercely criticized by some, notably because of the herbicide use associated with them. However, how much herbicide is applied to GMHT crops compared to conventional crops, and what impacts does the use of herbicide have? The paper first presents some factors explaining the predominance of GMHT crops. Then, trends in the use of herbicide for GM crops are studied in the case of the most widespread HT crop: HT soybean in the USA. The trends in the toxicity of herbicides applied to HT soybean are also addressed, as well as the appearance of glyphosate-resistant (GR) weeds. Lastly, the paper examines the spread of GR weeds and its impact. How are farmers, weed scientists, and the industry coping with this development, and what are the prospects of glyphosate-tolerant crops given weed resistance? In conclusion, some issues of sustainability and innovation governance raised by genetically modified herbicide-tolerant crops are discussed.

show abstract

“…Alternative economic and political incentive structures might produce different outcomes. Publicly funded biotech research at universities focused on drought resistance or nutrition could benefit the public, but lack the profit potential to motivate research and development from the private sector (Ervin et al ; Kloppenburg ; Wield et al ).…”

Section: Literature Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The controversy is often presented as one between antiscience scaremongers and everyone else (Maeseele ; Montenegro ). Yet there is a great deal of complexity that gets lost in this science‐antiscience discourse, related to the wider political, social, and environmental impacts of a small number of GE commodity crops (Buttel ; Ervin, Glenna, and Jussaume ; Lockie ; Schurman and Munro ).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The controversy is often presented as one between antiscience scaremongers and everyone else (Maeseele 2010;Montenegro 2015). Yet there is a great deal of complexity that gets lost in this science-antiscience discourse, related to the wider political, social, and environmental impacts of a small number of GE commodity crops (Buttel 2005;Ervin, Glenna, and Jussaume 2011;Lockie 2006;Schurman and Munro 2010). U.S. consumers have become more concerned about the production methods used to grow their food, in response to growing awareness of the environmental problems associated with industrial agriculture and the rise of diet-related illness (Allen 2004;Duram and Oberholtzer 2010;Mares and Alkon 2011).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Frankenfish or Fish to Feed the World? Scientism and Biotechnology Regulatory Policy

Bruce

2016

Rural Sociology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Scientism is an attempt to apply the methods and approach of the natural sciences to matters of human social and political concern. Scientism‐based discourse has been used to reframe the public debate about controversial science and technology into a risk assessment carried out by experts. The biotechnology industry has used a scientism‐based discourse to avoid regulation and labeling, claiming that the scientific makeup of their products is all that matters for governing regulatory policy, not their social, economic, or environmental impact. In this case study I examine the discourse used in support of and opposition to AquaAdvantage salmon, the first genetically engineered animal approved for human consumption. This case inspired an opposition coalition of consumer and environmental groups that led the FDA to organize a public meeting about its review of the fish. The analysis finds support for previous studies showing that regulatory debates over biotechnology in the United States are dominated by scientism, and that scientism generates public skepticism rather than confidence. In previous cases citizen groups were unable to challenge the authority of scientism‐based regulatory policy, but in this case the agency's decision not to require labeling was overruled by a congressional labeling mandate driven by citizen mobilization.

show abstract

The Theory and Practice of Genetically Engineered Crops and Agricultural Sustainability

Cited by 19 publications

References 59 publications

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

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

Herbicide-tolerant Transgenic Soybean over 15 Years of Cultivation: Pesticide Use, Weed Resistance, and Some Economic Issues. The Case of the USA

Frankenfish or Fish to Feed the World? Scientism and Biotechnology Regulatory Policy

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About