State science, risk and agricultural biotechnology: Bt cotton to Bt Brinjal in India

IF 4.4 1区 社会学 Q1 ANTHROPOLOGY Journal of Peasant Studies Pub Date : 2015-01-02 DOI:10.1080/03066150.2014.951835
R. Herring
{"title":"State science, risk and agricultural biotechnology: Bt cotton to Bt Brinjal in India","authors":"R. Herring","doi":"10.1080/03066150.2014.951835","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Agricultural biotechnology has been a project of India's developmental state since 1986, but implementation generated significant conflict. Sequential cases of two crops carrying the same transgene – Bt cotton and Bt brinjal (eggplant/aubergine) – facing the same authorization procedures produced different outcomes. The state science that approved Bt cotton was attacked as biased and dangerously inadequate by opponents, but the technology spread to virtually universal adoption by farmers. Bt aubergine was approved by the same Genetic Engineering Approval Committee (GEAC), but the decision was overruled, the GEAC downgraded and a moratorium imposed on the crop. Resultant conflicts engaged international networks, expanded the domestic arena in which science is contested and instigated restructuring of institutions for governance of genetic engineering. Divergent trajectories of the two crops corresponded to global patterns, but also reflected differences in agro-ecologies and state interests. In Bt cotton, state and cultivator interests dominated precautionary logics; in Bt eggplant, politics of risk dominated questions of agro-economics. The cases illustrate both the inherent vulnerability of science in politics and specific vulnerabilities of science embedded in particular institutions. Differences in institutional specificity of state science matter politically in explaining variation across countries in adoption and rejection of genetically engineered crops.","PeriodicalId":48271,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Peasant Studies","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":4.4000,"publicationDate":"2015-01-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/03066150.2014.951835","citationCount":"37","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Peasant Studies","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/03066150.2014.951835","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ANTHROPOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 37

Abstract

Agricultural biotechnology has been a project of India's developmental state since 1986, but implementation generated significant conflict. Sequential cases of two crops carrying the same transgene – Bt cotton and Bt brinjal (eggplant/aubergine) – facing the same authorization procedures produced different outcomes. The state science that approved Bt cotton was attacked as biased and dangerously inadequate by opponents, but the technology spread to virtually universal adoption by farmers. Bt aubergine was approved by the same Genetic Engineering Approval Committee (GEAC), but the decision was overruled, the GEAC downgraded and a moratorium imposed on the crop. Resultant conflicts engaged international networks, expanded the domestic arena in which science is contested and instigated restructuring of institutions for governance of genetic engineering. Divergent trajectories of the two crops corresponded to global patterns, but also reflected differences in agro-ecologies and state interests. In Bt cotton, state and cultivator interests dominated precautionary logics; in Bt eggplant, politics of risk dominated questions of agro-economics. The cases illustrate both the inherent vulnerability of science in politics and specific vulnerabilities of science embedded in particular institutions. Differences in institutional specificity of state science matter politically in explaining variation across countries in adoption and rejection of genetically engineered crops.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
国家科学、风险和农业生物技术:印度的Bt棉花到Bt茄子
自1986年以来,农业生物技术一直是印度发展国家的一个项目,但是实施过程产生了重大冲突。携带相同转基因的两种作物——Bt棉花和Bt茄子(茄子/茄子)——相继面临相同的授权程序,产生了不同的结果。批准Bt棉花的国家科学被反对者抨击为有偏见和危险的不充分,但这项技术几乎被农民普遍采用。Bt茄子也得到了同一个基因工程批准委员会(GEAC)的批准,但该决定被推翻,GEAC降级并暂停了该作物的种植。由此产生的冲突涉及到国际网络,扩大了科学受到争议的国内舞台,并推动了基因工程治理机构的重组。这两种作物的不同轨迹与全球模式相对应,但也反映了农业生态和国家利益的差异。在Bt棉花中,国家和种植者的利益主导了预防逻辑;在Bt茄子中,风险政治主导了农业经济问题。这些案例既说明了科学在政治中的固有脆弱性,也说明了科学在特定制度中的具体脆弱性。国家科学制度特殊性的差异在解释各国在采用和拒绝转基因作物方面的差异方面具有政治意义。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
10.50
自引率
17.60%
发文量
99
期刊介绍: A leading journal in the field of rural politics and development, The Journal of Peasant Studies (JPS) provokes and promotes critical thinking about social structures, institutions, actors and processes of change in and in relation to the rural world. It fosters inquiry into how agrarian power relations between classes and other social groups are created, understood, contested and transformed. JPS pays special attention to questions of ‘agency’ of marginalized groups in agrarian societies, particularly their autonomy and capacity to interpret – and change – their conditions.
期刊最新文献
Local Autonomy as a Human Right: The Quest for Local Self-Rule Local Autonomy as a Human Right: The Quest for Local Self-Rule , by Joshua B. Forrest, Lanham, Maryland, Rowman and Littlefield Press, 2021, 588 pp., $174 (hardcover), ISBN: 1538154498 Land struggle and Palestinian farmers’ livelihoods in the West Bank: between de-agrarianization and anti-colonial resistance Making soil in the Plantationocene Drugs and extractivism: opium cultivation and drug use in the Myanmar-China borderlands Threatening dystopias: the global politics of climate change adaptation in Bangladesh Threatening dystopias: the global politics of climate change adaptation in Bangladesh , by Kasia Paprocki, Ithaca, New York, Cornell University Press, 2021, 262pp., ISBN: 1501759159
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1