Genetically Modified Crops Research Papers (original) (raw)

– This Minireview paper summarizes the views of the authors on the history and current status of golden rice – the highly promising concept of introducing new genes into existing rice strains to make them capable to accumulate beta... more

– This Minireview paper summarizes the views of the authors on the history and current status of golden rice – the highly promising concept of introducing new genes into existing rice strains to make them capable to accumulate beta carotene (the biochemical precursor of vitamin A) in the grain. Based on the questionable success of genetically modified organisms to achieve a significant increase in food and feed production we speculate on the possibility of a breakthrough in this area via the latest discoveries in molecular biological techniques.

This paper frames the GM cotton approval debate in Turkey in the context of a socio-political process in which conflicts must be resolved between competing interests and among people who hold different value systems and have different... more

This paper frames the GM cotton approval debate in Turkey in the context of a socio-political process in which conflicts must be resolved between competing interests and among people who hold different value systems and have different priorities. Four different cotton farming alternatives—business as usual (BAU), ecological farming (ECO), GM farming (GM), and good agricultural practices (GAP)—are assessed and evaluated via a set of environmental, social, and economic criteria chosen on the basis of an extensive review of the cotton production and genetically modified organism (GMO) literatures, and in-depth interviews with several key stakeholders and experts in Turkey. The results show that when economic concerns are considered primary, GM farming is the preferred practice. In contrast, when only the social dimension is prioritised, the ECO alternative performs best. Finally, when the economic and social dimensions are appraised together, GAP emerges as a compromise solution. This study reveals that the decision to approve GM farming is not only complex but also value-laden and interest-based.

Farmers, activists, and the general public have all expressed strong opposition to the draft notification published by the FSSAI (Food Safety and Standards Authority of India) on November 27th of last year, questioning the future of... more

Farmers, activists, and the general public have all expressed strong opposition to the draft notification published by the FSSAI (Food Safety and Standards Authority of India) on November 27th of last year, questioning the future of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) in India. Despite the fact that GM crops to be grown in India have received environmental clearance from the country's regulatory authority, the Genetic Engineering Appraisal Committee (GEAC), according to a report published by the Agriculture's Global Agricultural Information Network. So, why India is still undecided on whether or not to allow GM crops to be grown in the country today?

Although some important features of genetically modified (GM) crops such as insect resistance, herbicide tolerance, and drought tolerance might seem to be beneficial for small-scale farmers, the adoption of GM technology by smallholders... more

Although some important features of genetically modified (GM) crops such as insect resistance, herbicide tolerance, and drought tolerance might seem to be beneficial for small-scale farmers, the adoption of GM technology by smallholders is still slight. Identifying pros and cons of using this technology is important to understand the impacts of GM crops on these farmers. This article reviews the main opportunities and challenges of GM crops for small-scale farmers in developing countries. The most significant advantages of GM crops include being independent to farm size, environment protection, improvement of occupational health issues, and the potential of bio-fortified crops to reduce malnutrition. Challenges faced by small-scale farmers for adoption of GM crops comprise availability and accessibility of GM crop seeds, seed dissemination and price, and the lack of adequate information. In addition, R&D and production costs in using GM crops make it difficult for these farmers to a...

En repollo es una planta bianual. En clima templado, dura un año para crecer y otro año, para producir flores y semilla. En clima tropical, la planta tiene un ciclo de tres meses pero, normalmente no puede florecer

In this study, we present the bibliometric trends emerging from research outputs on consumer perception and preference for genetically modified (GM) foods and policy prescriptions for enabling the consumption using VOSviewer visualization... more

In this study, we present the bibliometric trends emerging from research outputs on consumer perception and preference for genetically modified (GM) foods and policy prescriptions for enabling the consumption using VOSviewer visualization software. Consumers’ positive response is largely influenced by the decision of the governments to ban or approve the GM crops cultivation. Similarly, the public support increases when the potential benefits of the technology are well articulated, consumption increases with a price discount, people’s trust on the government and belief in science increases with a positive influence by the media. Europe and the USA are the first region and country, respectively, in terms of the number of active institutions per research output, per-capita GDP publication and citations. We suggest research-, agri-food industries-, and society oriented policies to be implemented by the stakeholders to ensure the safety of GM foods, encourage consumer-based studies, and increase public awareness toward these food products.

Public opposition to genetically modified organisms (GMOs) remains strong. By contrast, studies demon- strate again and again that GM crops make a valuable contribution to the development of a sustainable type of agriculture. The... more

Public opposition to genetically modified organisms (GMOs) remains strong. By contrast, studies demon- strate again and again that GM crops make a valuable contribution to the development of a sustainable type of agriculture. The discrepancy between public opinion and the scientific evidence requires an explanation. We argue that intuitive expectations about the world render the human mind vulnerable to particular misrepresentations of GMOs. We explain how the involvement of particular intuitions accounts for the popularity, persistence, and typical features of GM opposition and tackle possible objections to our approach. To conclude, we discuss the implications for science education, science communica- tion, and the environmental movement.

There is no satisfactory legal remedy for farmers whose farm has been contaminated by genetically modified (GM) material. This is a deficiency of Australia’s Gene Technology Act 2000 and it has not been remedied. In the Marsh v Baxter... more

There is no satisfactory legal remedy for farmers whose farm has been contaminated by genetically modified (GM) material. This is a deficiency of Australia’s Gene Technology Act 2000 and it has not been remedied. In the Marsh v Baxter case (2010-2016) an organic farm in Western Australia (WA) was contaminated with GM canola from a neighbouring farm. The organic farm lost its certification (along with the price premium for organic produce). The organic farmer (Marsh) sued the GM farmer (Baxter) for the agreed damages of A$85,000. The case was lost in the WA Supreme Court, then in the Court of Appeal, and finally it was rejected by the High Court of Australia. The legal fees were in the order of A$2,000,000, which is quite disproportionate to the agreed loss. A Parliamentary Inquiry (2017-2019) in WA examined “Mechanisms for compensation for economic loss to farmers in Western Australia caused by contamination by genetically modified material”. There were 121 submissions to the Inquiry and 22 public hearings. Seven ‘mechanisms’ were considered: (i) Do nothing; (ii) a GM Levy; (iii) a GM Technology Licence Bond; (iv) Non-GM farmer Insurance; (v) GM farmer Insurance; (vi) a Compulsory Third Party (CTP) GM Scheme; and, (vii) the Government pays. After its deliberations, the Standing Committee on Environment and Public Affairs did not recommend any change from the present unsatisfactory state of affairs where reliance on the common law offers no effective protection for non-GM farmers against contamination by genetically modified organisms (GMOs) (as witnessed in the Marsh v Baxter case). The ‘Do nothing’ option, which was supported by Monsanto and pro-GM farmer groups, prevailed. This paper explores the context and content of the Parliamentary Inquiry, presents the six proposed proactive options for compensation (of which only four appeared in the Inquiry Report), and the twelve findings of the Inquiry. Ultimately the Committee was timid where it might have been bold. The Inquiry was a lost opportunity for righting a known wrong. The Inquiry outcome will ensure that GM-farming remains a very contentious issue in WA and continues to lack any semblance of a social licence. However, the WA Parliamentary Inquiry (in toto, viz. the submissions, the hearings, and the Report) provides a rich trove of views and material for legislators and regulators in other jurisdictions who face the exact same issue of GM contaminations.

This paper examines the threat posed by genetically modified organisms (GMOs) to organic agriculture and certification. In the case of Marsh v Baxter an organic farm in Western Australia is contaminated by GMO material including seeds and... more

This paper examines the threat posed by genetically modified organisms (GMOs) to organic agriculture and certification. In the case of Marsh v Baxter an organic farm in Western Australia is contaminated by GMO material including seeds and seed pods blown from a neighbouring farm and the organic certification is lost. This paper presents a five-year chronology of events and the processes, outcomes and costs of seeking legal redress, of proving negligence and/or nuisance, and of seeking damages and an injunction to constrain the GMO farmer. Damages are agreed at A$85,000 (€60,000) while legal costs are in the region of A$2,000,000 (€1,400,000) to date.

Most (85%) of the global genetically modified organism (GMO) agriculture is accounted for by just four countries in North and South America. The ‘big four’ of the GM world are USA (with 40% of the global GMO hectares), followed by Brazil... more

Most (85%) of the global genetically modified organism (GMO) agriculture is accounted for by just four countries in North and South America. The ‘big four’ of the GM world are USA (with 40% of the global GMO hectares), followed by Brazil (26%), Argentina (12%), and Canada (7%). The world total of GMO agriculture is 189.8 million hectares from a total of 24 countries. The number of countries planting GMOs peaked in 2010, at 29 countries, and has been progressively declining year by year since then. Most countries (88%) have no GMO hectares. Australia is just a vestigial presence on the map of World GMO Agriculture. Of the global total hectares of GMO agriculture, Australia accounts for 774,000 hectares, comprising 492,000 ha of GM canola and 282,000 ha of GM cotton. Australia’s share of global GMO hectares is 0.4%, and is declining. Australia’s GMO agriculture accounts for 0.2% of Australia’s total agriculture hectares. The map of World GMO Agriculture is dominated by North and South America. Asia has a modest presence, led by India (cotton), Pakistan (cotton) and China (cotton, papaya). Africa has a diminutive presence led by South Africa (corn, soy, cotton). Just four GMO crops account for almost all (more than 99%) of GMO agriculture hectares. The ‘big four’ of GM crops are: GM soy (50%), GM corn (31%, GM cotton (13%), and GM canola (5%). Most of the world’s GMOs are herbicide tolerant (e.g. to glyphosate). USA leads the world with 12 GMO crops, Canada follows with six GM crops. Other countries have just three GM crops (n=5 countries), or two (n=5), or just one (n=12). Russia is a GMO-free country and has ambitions to be a lead exporter of organic produce and to reap the organic premium.

GMO moratoria are in place in Australia, in some states and not in others. Is co-existence possible between organic farming and GMO farming? And if so, under what circumstances? Australia has more certified organic land than any other... more

GMO moratoria are in place in Australia, in some states and not in others. Is co-existence possible between organic farming and GMO farming? And if so, under what circumstances? Australia has more certified organic land than any other country, with a reported 12.0 million hectares of certified organic land compared to the world total of 37.5 million hectares. In a recent court case, an organic farmer lost his organic certification because of GMO contamination. A total of 325 hectares of his 478 hectare farm were contaminated with GM canola blown from a neighbouring property, and this resulted in the decertification of most of the farm. The organic farmer sued his neighbour, a GMO farmer, on the basis of nuisance or negligence, he sought damages for loss of income, and he sought an injunction to rein in his neighbour‟s future GMO farming practices. The case ran before the Supreme Court of Western Australia over three weeks and it generated more than 1000 pages of transcript. The case was dismissed in its entirety, in a 150 page judgment, and is now subject to an appeal. This paper examines the judgment, in the light of the trial transcript of this landmark case, with the view to determining the implications for the future of organic farming and GMO farming, and in particular to ascertain what lessons can be learned from this litigation.

The land area devoted to the cultivation of genetically modified (GM) plants has increased in recent years: in 2012 such plants were grown on over 170 million hectares globally, in 28 different countries, and are at present used by 17.3... more

The land area devoted to the cultivation of genetically modified (GM) plants has increased in recent years: in 2012 such plants were grown on over 170 million hectares globally, in 28 different countries, and are at present used by 17.3 million farmers worldwide. The majority of GM plants are used as feed material for food-producing farm animals. Despite the facts that GM plants have been used as feed for years and a number of feeding studies have proved their safety for animals, they still give rise to emotional public discussion. This paper reviews and discusses the results of recent experiments on the effects of feeds derived from genetically modified plants (GM feeds) on the physiological and metabolic indices of livestock, poultry and fish. The number of peer-reviewed papers on studies evaluating the influence of feeding food-producing animals with genetically modified materials is high. Most of these studies were carried out with GM plants with improved agronomic traits, i.e. herbicide-tolerant crops and crops protected against common pests; however, in some experiments, GM crops with enhanced nutritional properties were assessed. In the relevant part of these studies, not only production parameters but also different indices of the metabolic status of animals were analysed, and only a few minor differences with no biological relevance were found in livestock or poultry experiments. A greater number of minor effects on selected metabolic parameters were detected in fish studies; however, the causes of these differences were unclear and it is difficult to determine whether they were due to the genetic modification of the GM feed materials used. Since the results presented in the vast majority of experiments did not indicate any negative effects of GM materials, it can be concluded that commercialised transgenic crops can be safely fed to target food-producing animals without affecting metabolic indices or the quality of such products as meat, milk and eggs.

The European honey bee, Apis mellifera, is well-known for its role in honey production, its ecological importance in plant reproduction and biodiversity, and more importantly, the pollination of many economically significant crops in the... more

The European honey bee, Apis mellifera, is well-known for its role in honey production, its ecological importance in plant reproduction and biodiversity, and more importantly, the pollination of many economically significant crops in the United States (Staveley, Law, Fairbrother, & Menzie, 2014; vanEngelsdorp & Meixner, 2010). The food we eat from the most nutritious crops in our diets – key fruits and vegetables – as well as some crops used as fodder in meat and dairy production significantly depend on the key ecosystem service that honey bees provide: natural insect-mediated pollination (Tirado, Simon, & Johnston, 2013). As the predominant and most economically important group of pollinators in most geographical regions, both managed and wild honey bees pollinate most wild plants so that they may reproduce, thereby directly or indirectly supporting wild habitats that provide other ecosystem services (Tirado et al., 2013). One can then see the possible ramifications of the ongoing bee colony decline in recent years; however, the economic and ecological consequences tend to be viewed separately in their own scope, and it is not entirely clear how the two areas intersect.

In this study the effects of different learning environments on the promotion of decision-making competence for the socioscientific issue of genetically modified crops is investigated. The comparison focuses on direct vs. indirect... more

In this study the effects of different learning environments on the promotion of decision-making competence for the socioscientific issue of genetically modified crops is investigated. The comparison focuses on direct vs. indirect instructions. Therefore on the one hand a sophisticated decision-making strategy was presented to the directly instructed experimental group (1) and had to be applied correctly. On the other hand indirectly instructed students had to invent an appropriate strategy by themselves (2) based on the given information and the structure of the problem context. Group discussions are analysed qualitatively in order (1) to outline how the given strategy was understood and its results were reflected on by the students and (2) to explore the characteristics of invented strategies and their degree of complexity. Results indicate that the direct instruction of complex decision-making strategies may lead to a lack of understanding of the decision process when the given strategy is applied and therefore may cause rejection of the final decision. Indirectly instructed students were able to invent sophisticated decision-making strategies containing compensatory trade-offs. It is concluded that when directly instructing complex decision-making strategies, essential parts of reflection have to be integrated in order to gain greater transparency. Accordingly, empirical evidence has been found to consider indirect instruction as a possible way to foster decision-making strategies for complex socioscientific issues even if compensatory procedures are considered to be necessary.

In the context of global warming and world climate change, Muslim nations across the globe are no exception in grappling with catastrophic and multifaceted environmental crises. In dealing with this phenomenon, Muslim scholars have been... more

In the context of global warming and world climate change, Muslim nations across the globe are no exception in grappling with catastrophic and multifaceted environmental crises. In dealing with this phenomenon, Muslim scholars have been promoting a laudable principle of environmental preservation (hifz al-bi'ah) via the maqasid al-shari'ah, however not without unresolved ambiguities with regard to its actual focus and real implementation. This article provides an alternative conception of environmental preservation by drawing a connection to the well-established Shari'ah's objective of preserving fitrah. While the mainstream discourse of preserving fitrah primarily deals with human's innate dispositions, this article suggests its expansion to a wider scope of nature's innate properties, drawn upon from the resource of scientific discourse in systems thinking. Through a comparative analysis on Islamic sources and systems thinking literatures on nature, the article proposes that 'nature's ability to sustain life through systemic interconnections', constitutes the important aspect of fitrah that necessitates preservation, even enhancement. Finally, through the suggested conception of environmental fitrah, the article discusses some pressing issues of Genetically Modified (GM) foods, and climate change in order to delineate the feasibility of systems thinking approach that may lead to reasonable policy recommendations.

Global food security is vulnerable due to massive growth of the human population, changes in global climate, the emergence of novel/more virulent pathogens, and demands from increasingly discerning consumers for chemical-free, sustainably... more

Global food security is vulnerable due to massive growth of the human population, changes in global climate, the emergence of novel/more virulent pathogens, and demands from increasingly discerning consumers for chemical-free, sustainably produced food products. Bacterium- based biological control agents (BCAs), if used as part of an integrated management system, may satisfy the above demands. We focus on the advantages, limitations, problems, and challenges involved in such strategies.

The genetically modified (GM) canola grown in Western Australia (WA) is glyphosate resistant. It has been grown in WA since 2010, when an exemption under the WA GM Moratorium was declared. The price penalty for GM canola (compared to non... more

The genetically modified (GM) canola grown in Western Australia (WA) is glyphosate resistant. It has been grown in WA since 2010, when an exemption under the WA GM Moratorium was declared. The price penalty for GM canola (compared to non GM canola) is 7.2% based on the past five years of price data from two WA receival depots (Albany and Kwinana). The average annual price penalty for GM canola varied from a low of 5.3% ($29 per tonne in the 2017/18 season at Kwinana) to a high of 9.2% ($49 per tonne in the 2015/16 season at Albany). WA GM canola has a lower oil content (e.g. 46.9% versus 48.4%) and a higher moisture content (e.g. 5.5% versus 5.3%) than non GM canola. It is suggested that the price penalty for GM canola in WA would be greater if the segregation, phytosanitary and cleaning regimes were more stringent, rather than tolerating 0.9% contamination by GMOs for WA’s so called ‘non GM canola’. In the future, the price penalty for GMOs may be higher as consumers and purchasers become aware that what has been passed off as ‘canola’ is GM canola. The Canola Receival Standards make no mention that 0.9% contamination of non GM canola (CAN1) by GMOs is tolerated. As markets tighten up their tolerance of GM contamination, the risk is that WA’s so called ‘non GM canola’ suffers market exclusions.

Drawing on ethnographic research, we analyze the motivations, conditions of possibility, and strategies of seed saving among different farmers in Colombia. For indigenous agroecological farmers, seed saving represents a form of resistance... more

Drawing on ethnographic research, we analyze the motivations, conditions of possibility, and strategies of seed saving among different farmers in Colombia. For indigenous agroecological farmers, seed saving represents a form of resistance mobilized through narratives of tradition, sovereignty, freedom, and environmental protection. In contrast, industrial farmers, who grow genetically-modified cotton, carry out seed saving surreptitiously to minimize production costs and to resist the enclosure of seeds by corporations. Despite these two groups of farmers' different political motivations and strategies, both types of seed saving practices challenge corporate seed control. Can these seed-saving practices be considered forms of seed sovereignty activism?

The Tasmanian GMO Moratorium has served the interests of the state well. The ‘clean and green’ image of Tasmania continues to grow from strength to strength. This branding is underpinned by consumer, visitor, and investor perceptions.... more

The Tasmanian GMO Moratorium has served the interests of the state well. The ‘clean and green’ image of Tasmania continues to grow from strength to strength. This branding is underpinned by consumer, visitor, and investor perceptions. These perceptions continue to be validated by Tasmania’s GMO Moratorium. GMOs are a technology without a social licence and are a cause for social friction. They are not wanted by consumers. They attract a price penalty in the market place, and they contaminate non-GM farms and the food chain. The two GM crops in Australia are GM canola and GM cotton. The former is in decline (5% per year) and the latter is in decline (down 53% from the peak of 2010) and exhibits a highly volatile and erratic pattern of uptake. The relaxation of the WA Moratorium in Western Australia in 2010 (and subsequent relinquishment) has meant that there is now no GM-free canola available in WA. The so-called non GM canola (which is most of the WA canola) is contaminated by GM canola up to 0.9%, and the non GM canola seed sold to WA farmers is contaminated by GM up to 0.5%. It is claimed by GM advocates in WA that successful segregation is “impossible” (and they may be right). GM canola is a crop dependent on the herbicide glyphosate. The application of glyphosate is a required part of the production cycle for GM canola. Glyphosate is a carcinogen that also causes multigenerational disease and adverse health outcomes. Tasmania can produce premium quality food and be rewarded with premium prices. This can achieve the agricultural goals and aspirations of the State. Organic food is the ‘gold standard’ for premium food and attracts price premiums of 100%, and more. The global organic market is undersupplied and this is an opportunity for Tasmania (and others). Australia is the world leader in organics uptake, and Tasmania is well placed to grow its organic sector. GMOs are a threat to organic farming. It is recommended that the GMO Moratorium is retained and continued in perpetuity (i.e. renewed without a sunset and review clause). In this way producers and investors have a degree of certainty that can encourage investment in growth and marketing of Tasmanian produce as ‘clean and green, and as premium and GM-free. Seventeen reasons for maintaining Tasmania’s GMO Moratorium are presented.

The progress made in plant biotechnology has provided an opportunity to new food crops being developed having desirable traits for improving crop yield, reducing the use of agrochemicals and adding nutritional properties to staple crops.... more

The progress made in plant biotechnology has provided an opportunity to new food
crops being developed having desirable traits for improving crop yield, reducing the
use of agrochemicals and adding nutritional properties to staple crops. However,
genetically modified (GM) crops have become a subject of intense debate in which
opponents argue that GM crops represent a threat to individual freedom, the
environment, public health and traditional economies. Despite the advances in food
crop agriculture, the current world situation is still characterised by massive hunger
and chronic malnutrition, representing a major public health problem. Biofortified
GM crops have been considered an important and complementary strategy for
delivering naturally-fortified staple foods to malnourished populations. Expert advice
and public concern have led to designing strategies for assessing the potential risks
involved in cultivating and consuming GM crops. The present critical review was
aimed at expressing some conflicting points of view about the potential risks of GM
crops for public health. It was concluded that GM food crops are no more risky than
those genetically modified by conventional methods and that these GM crops might
contribute towards reducing the amount of malnourished people around the world.
However, all this needs to be complemented by effective political action aimed at
increasing the income of people living below the poverty-line.

This paper frames genetically modified organisms (GMOs) as invasive species. This offers a way of considering the reception, diffusion and management of GMOs in the foodscape. “An invasive non-native species is any non-native animal or... more

This paper frames genetically modified organisms (GMOs) as invasive species. This offers a way of considering the reception, diffusion and management of GMOs in the foodscape. “An invasive non-native species is any non-native animal or plant that has the ability to spread causing damage to the environment, the economy, our health and the way we live” (NNSS, 2017). Without any social licence, pesticide companies have thrust GMOs into the foodscape. The release of GMOs has generally been unwelcome, there has been no ‘pull’ factor from consumers and there has been vocal resistance from many. The apologists for GMOs have argued the self-contradictory conceit that GMOs are ‘same but different’. Under this logically untenable stance, GMOs are to be excluded from specific regulation because they are the ‘same’ as existing organisms, while simultaneously they are ‘different’ and so open to patenting. GMOs are patented and this demonstrates that, prima facie, these are novel organisms which are non-native to the foodscape. GMO apologists have campaigned intensively, and successfully in USA, to ensure that consumers are kept in the dark and that GMOs remain unlabelled - as a consequence GMOs are ubiquitous in US consumer foods. In contrast, in Australia GMOs are required to be labelled if present in consumer products and, in consequence, Australian food manufacturers do not use them. The release of a GMO calls for biosecurity measures. After trial plots of Monsanto GM canola in Tasmania in the 1990s, the sites continue to be biosecurity monitored for GMO escape, and volunteer canola plants continue to appear two decades later. In Western Australia the escape of GMO canola into a neighbouring organic farm resulted in the loss of organic certification and the monetary loss of the organic premium for produce. GMO produce sells for a 10% discount because of market forces and the consumer aversion to GMOs. Where non-GM product is accidentally contaminated with some GM grain, the whole batch is discounted and is sold as GMO. There is a lack of evidence that GMOs can be contained and many jurisdictions have banned the introduction of GMOs. GMOs have the potential and the propensity to contaminate non-GMO crops and thereby devalue them. The evidence is that GMOs are invasive species, they are unwelcome by consumers, peaceful coexistence with non-GM varieties is a fiction, and GMOs are appropriately managed as a biosecurity issue.

The importance of socio-economic impacts (SEI) from the introduction and use of genetically modified (GM) crops is reflected in increasing efforts to include them in regulatory frameworks. Aiming to identify and understand the present... more

The importance of socio-economic impacts (SEI) from the introduction and use of genetically modified (GM) crops is reflected in increasing efforts to include them in regulatory frameworks. Aiming to identify and understand the present knowledge on SEI of GM crops, we here report the findings from an extensive study of the published international scientific peer-reviewed literature. After applying specified selection criteria, a total of 410 articles are analysed. The main findings include: (i) limited empirical research on SEI of GM crops in the scientific literature; (ii) the main focus of the majority of the published research is on a restricted set of monetary economic parameters; (iii) proportionally, there are very few empirical studies on social and non-monetary economic aspects; (iv) most of the research reports only short-term findings; (v) the variable local contexts and conditions are generally ignored in research methodology and analysis; (vi) conventional agriculture is the commonly used comparator, with minimal consideration of other substantially different agricultural systems; and (vii) there is the overall tendency to frame the research upon not validated theoretical assumptions, and to over-extrapolate smallscale and short-term specific results to generalized conclusions. These findings point to a lack of empirical and comprehensive research on SEI of GM crops for possible use in decision-making. Broader questions and improved methodologies, assisted by more rigorous peer-review, will be required to overcome current research shortcomings.

In 1996 Argentina adopted genetically modified (GM) soybeans as a central part of its national development strategy. Today, Argentina is the third largest global grower and exporter of GM crops. Its soybeans—which have been modified to... more

In 1996 Argentina adopted genetically modified (GM) soybeans as a central part of its national development strategy. Today, Argentina is the third largest global grower and exporter of GM crops. Its soybeans—which have been modified to tolerate being sprayed with herbicides—now cover half of the country's arable land and represent a third of its total exports. While soy has brought about modernization and economic growth, it has also created tremendous social and ecological harm: rural displacement, concentration of landownership, food insecurity, deforestation, violence, and the negative health effects of toxic agrochemical exposure. In Seeds of Power Amalia Leguizamón explores why Argentines largely support GM soy despite the widespread damage it creates. She reveals how agribusiness, the state, and their allies in the media and sciences deploy narratives of economic redistribution, scientific expertise, and national identity as a way to elicit compliance among the country’s most vulnerable rural residents. In this way, Leguizamón demonstrates that GM soy operates as a tool of power to obtain consent, to legitimate injustice, and to quell potential dissent in the face of environmental and social violence.

The global food system has severe implications for human health, soil quality, biodiversity, and quality of life. This paper provides an analysis on how transnational alliances challenge the global food system. We illustrate this by... more

The global food system has severe implications for human health, soil quality, biodiversity, and quality of life. This paper provides an analysis on how transnational alliances challenge the global food system. We illustrate this by focusing on the activities and hearings of the International Monsanto Tribunal (IMT), held in the Hague in 2016. The IMT provided a platform for civil society and enabled transnational alliances to demand attention for local struggles and legal disputes in relation to Monsanto’s products. With the involvement of independent and renowned experts, the knowledge exchange between local victims and civil society was enhanced, and the IMT reinforced social movement’s goals towards demanding justice for the negative effects associated with the global food system. The advisory opinion determined that Monsanto’s practices are in violation with human rights standards. The IMT exemplified that there is an immediate need for structural change in the current global food system.

Genetically modified (GM) crops are providing supply for ever increasing demand of food and feed; however, there are concerns about their biosafety. Many unlabeled genetically modified products have started to appear in the Jordanian... more

Genetically modified (GM) crops are providing supply for ever increasing demand
of food and feed; however, there are concerns about their biosafety. Many unlabeled
genetically modified products have started to appear in the Jordanian market, this raise a
question about the origin of these products and whether the genetic events are
authorized. This research study intends to investigate this issue in-depth as it aims at the
detection of GM maize food and feed in the Jordanian Market. It also seeks to examine
Jordanians awareness towards GM products, and look into the current status of laws and
regulations as well as examine the ethical and religious views of the public regarding
this subject.
The research methodology included reviewing related articles and previous
studies, looking through the internet and documentaries, and most importantly
collecting maize samples from the market and carrying out lab experiments for
detection of maize GM products. This was followed by developing a survey and
interviewing people from public/ private sectors and several governmental & nongovernmental
institutions.
Experimental results have shown that out of 40 maize samples collected 29
(72.5%) were found to be genetically modified. Moreover 20 GM maize samples (69%)
were found to contain genetic element of 390 bp in addition to 123 bp sequence. The
results showed that the primer pair normally used to amplify a 123 bp DNA fragment of
the standard CaMV P-35S promoter also amplified a 390 bp DNA fragment in GM
maize.
xii
The results of Jordanians awareness towards GM products showed that out of the
400 people who were surveyed 18 % said that they know very well what genetically
modified food is. However out of this percent very few people gave the exact right
scientific answer. When asked about their religious and ethical views more than 45 %
said their judgment depends on the nature of the change i.e (the kind of species it was
taken from) and the reason behind this change. 75.5 % of the people stressed that it is
very important to label genetically modified food, and 80 % think that the government
must enact strict law and set regulations which control and monitor the genetically
modified products (GM) products and prevent the entry of unauthorized GM products.
In 2004, Jordan came out with a National Bio-safety Framework and a Proposed
By-Law for bio-safety of Genetically Modified Organisms which was published in
gazette in 2006. Recently, the Ministry of Environment in collaboration with specialists
from governmental, non-governmental organizations and universities has prepared a
bio-safety law which we hope to be put into force as soon as possible.

The growing crisis of bee health has shone a spotlight on the problems facing pollinator populations in many parts of the world, the worrying implications for agriculture and ecosystems , and some of the risks of pesticides. Although this... more

The growing crisis of bee health has shone a spotlight on the problems facing pollinator populations in many parts of the world, the worrying implications for agriculture and ecosystems , and some of the risks of pesticides. Although this attention is important and can open a range of critical vistas, the threats to bees, other pollinators, and the future of pollination are too often framed in narrow ways. The goal of this paper is to provide a systematic way of thinking about the crisis of bee populations by examining the changing dynamics of pollination within industrial agriculture, drawing heavily on transformations in the United States and Canada. We set out a case for understanding pollination as a biophysical barrier to industrial organization and the rise of pollination services as a response that temporarily fixes (or overrides) this barrier, while containing an internal set of contradictions and overrides. We argue that these dialectic relations are continually generating further problems and hope that this lens can help inform critical education, outreach, and movement building with respect to the urgent problems of bee and pollinator health. In particular , we stress the need to connect growing bee-related advocacy with struggles to confront industrial capitalist agriculture. We confirm that this work is original and has not been published elsewhere, nor is it currently under consideration for publication elsewhere.

Genetically modified (GM) plants constitute an increasingly significant part of the crops available on the feed market. To date, the most common GM plants have been those with enhanced agronomic traits. Known as first-generation... more

Genetically modified (GM) plants constitute an increasingly significant part of the crops available on the feed market. To date, the most common GM plants have been those with enhanced agronomic traits. Known as first-generation transgenic plants, they are substantially equivalent to materials from conventional, parental plant lines. Recently, intensive experimental works using genetic engineering methods, have resulted in production of transgenic plants with substantial changes in chemical composition, these are referred to as second-generation GM plants. The main objective of such trangenesis is to improve the nutritional properties of crops by increasing the level of desirable substances or decreasing the quantity of harmful compounds in the seeds. The article discusses the results from research conducted in a number of laboratories into the use of GM crops with enhanced nutritional properties as feed materials for poultry. On the basis of the literature data presented, we conclude that GM plants with improved nutritional value, namely GM crops with enhanced available phosphorus content, or an increased concentration of limiting amino acids, or containing genes expressing transgenic enzymes or antimicrobial substances, can offer poultry producers several considerable benefits.

According to the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) and USA Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), herbicide tolerant (Roundup Ready or RR) and insect resistant (Bacillus thuringiensis or Bt) corn has “no significant impact”... more

According to the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) and USA Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), herbicide tolerant (Roundup Ready or RR) and insect resistant (Bacillus thuringiensis or Bt) corn has “no significant impact” on human health and environmental integrity. In Europe, genetically modified (GM) maize strains – the identical Bt and RR biotech crops used in the USA – are banned by a “safeguard clause” that allows any member state of the EU to impose limited term restrictions on an approved imported or exported product. To understand these different policies, an explanatory model that analyzes political culture as a recursive phenomenon that impacts, and is influenced by, regulations must be considered. The way governments regulate modern biotechnology is not necessarily a reflection of how their political culture perceives the new scientific technology, but how their existing regulatory structure can create a political culture of acceptance or rejection for contested technological advancements. This comparative study casts doubt on interpreting agricultural biotechnology decisions solely on equations of risk analysis, and offers a detailed cultural analysis of the regulatory differentiation of modern agricultural policy between America and Europe.

The SETA group (Agricultural Science and Technology) sent a letter to the Italian Parliament advising them not to adopt a legislative measure that favors organic and biodynamic agriculture compared to the conventional one. Another group... more

The SETA group (Agricultural Science and Technology) sent a letter to the Italian Parliament advising them not to adopt a legislative measure that favors organic and biodynamic agriculture compared to the conventional one. Another group of scientists thinks instead that the Italian government should favor organic and biodynamic agriculture and explains its reasons. The current article lists the SETA letter and the point of view of other Italian and international ecologists, economists, pedologists, ecologists, writers and artists, which are tendentially "protectors of nature" but not idealists. Nor are they so much in agreement with each other. Judge for yourself in scrolling through the Discussion chapter. The divergence leads to the "why" it is necessary to switch to organic farming not on the "need" to do so. There are also disappointments about the use of GMOs or the costs of highly technological agriculture. The situation is such on planet Earth that it is necessary to involve the whole society to get out of it. And politicians are also needed to structure the collective action that only if conceived by the whole society and not by individuals or by non-coordinated organizations can save our species. We are convinced that agriculture and soil are among the fundamental levers of this action.

The African food security issue is further compounded by an increase and by over-dependence on rain-fed agriculture, with no assurance of yields, farmers' displacement disputes, and insecure property ownership. The issue of change which... more

The African food security issue is further compounded by an increase and by over-dependence on rain-fed agriculture, with no assurance of yields, farmers' displacement disputes, and insecure property ownership. The issue of change which is mostly depend on climate which is progressively placing the significant restrictions on Africa in order to be able to feed its population.

This paper examines one important aspect of the current organization of scientific and technological research – namely, the system of patenting and licensing and its role in structuring the production and dissemination of knowledge. The... more

This paper examines one important aspect of the current organization of scientific and technological research – namely, the system of patenting and licensing and its role in structuring the production and dissemination of knowledge. The primary justification of patenting in science and technology is consequentialist in nature. On this account, patenting incentivizes research and thereby promotes the development of scientific and technological knowledge, which in turn facilitates social progress. Some have disputed this argument, on the grounds that patenting actually inhibits the development of knowledge. In this paper, I make a stronger argument; in some areas of research in the US – in particular, research on GM seeds – patents and patent licenses can be, and are in fact being, used to prohibit some research. I discuss three potential solutions to this problem: voluntary agreements, eliminating patents, and a research exemption. I argue against eliminating patents, and I show that while voluntary agreements and a research exemption could be helpful, they do not sufficiently address the problems of access that are discussed here. More extensive changes in the organization of research are necessary. In addition to developing an argument about patenting and licensing, this paper illustrates a promising approach to social epistemology.

The Australian Parliament voted to deregulate some GMOs on November 13, 2019. Legislation that has been in place for two decades, placed the regulatory burden and oversight of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) in Australia on a... more

The Australian Parliament voted to deregulate some GMOs on November 13, 2019. Legislation that has been in place for two decades, placed the regulatory burden and oversight of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) in Australia on a government agency, the Office of the Gene Technology Regulator (OGTR). The OGTR has recast the previous broad definition of GMOs to now exclude certain GMOs, nominating SDN-1 GMOs for exclusion. The Parliament was responsible for previously casting the definition of GMOs broadly. No cost/benefit analysis was presented by the OGTR to support their more narrow-casting of the GMO definition. The GMO regulation system of Australia was not broken. It did not need fixing. Even less did it need watering down. Over the past twenty years, the OGTR has never rejected a GMO application for approval. A history of multiple GMO incidents and contaminations support the need for continuing regulatory oversight.