Hope Not Hype - Third World Network

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Preface xiii Extensive citation to the peer-reviewed literature is provided, but I have tried to tell the story as much as possible in the words of the peer-reviewed authors upon which much of the Assessment is based. These are not necessarily the Assessment authors, but those who contributed to the research base that the Assessment draws upon. While this may at times jar the flow of the text, it has value in providing the decision-maker, civil society leader, negotiator and media with a context for important points and making it possible to recall precise language in the very words of the researchers on the cutting edge of the issues. I even on occasion quote myself. Although it may seem odd to see, and was odd to write, when the quote was from a peer-reviewed publication this device fitted the style of the text. In any case, why rewrite something when making the point in any other way would amount to simply changing the words for the sake of it This book is not a comprehensive review of the literature on agricultural science and technology. For that, the reader should study the many reports within the Assessment. Instead, this book floats above the debates among experts to show how the authors reached final conclusions and recommendations. Most of the literature cited will be indicative of research that in the end was judged to be unanswered by an opposing view or, using the best judgment possible in an uncertain world, was determined to be the most consistent with research coming from other disciplines. Acknowledgements I want to thank my co-authors on the Assessment for teaching me so much about agriculture. This process has stirred in me respect for those who agree and disagree with the conclusions reached there and in this book. I don’t believe that many individuals in industry, government, civil society or academia are disingenuous. While there is often disagreement, positions are taken on principle and not self-interest. Having said this, we cannot forget that both subtle and not-so-subtle insecurities and loyalties influence how people see the world (e.g., Katz et al., 2003; Mirowski and Van Horn, 2005). Scholars and industry scientists share the same common capacity as lawyers and environmental groups to be advocates. So while there would be no disagreement on the common goals of the Assessment, there is considerable debate on the path to those ends. Most of that debate revolves around just what is relevant to evaluating the success or failure of a technology or ideology. The great value of a project of the scale of the Assessment was to take away any possibility that a small group of people could restrict the criteria for evaluating the effects of biotechnology and market ideologies on agriculture. I would also like to thank the Assessment’s Secretariat for their encouragement and assistance with this book. I cannot forget to mention the University of Canterbury and especially my colleagues in the School of Biological Sciences and the Centre for Integrated Research in Biosafety who created space for me to participate in the Assessment and granted me a short sabbatical leave that helped me to write the book. Special mention is reserved for Camilo Rodriguez-Beltran, Thomas Bøhn, Marina Cretenet, Joanna Goven, Brigitta Kurenbach, Billie Moore and Paul Roughan. My gratitude goes to those who reviewed the manuscript and made such careful suggestions for improvement, especially
xiv Hope Not Hype Denise Caruso, Tarita Holm, Beverly McIntyre, Robert Mann, Paula Jameson, Jeffrey Smith and Simon Terry. Lim Li Ching and Lean Ka-Min not only reviewed the entire book, but they were patient and constructive editors. Dedication Lastly, this book is dedicated to my wife, Juliet Thorpe, who has made inspiring me a lifestyle. Jack A. Heinemann Christchurch, New Zealand 28 December 2008 References FAO (2006). http://www.un.org/apps/news/story.aspNewsID=20994. Date of access: 6 June 2008. Gepts, P. and Papa, R. (2003). Possible effects of (trans)gene flow from crops on the genetic diversity from landraces and wild relatives. Environ. Biosafety Res. 2, 89-103. Katz, D., Caplan, A. L. and Merz, J. F. (2003). All gifts large and small. Am. J. Bioeth. 3, 39-46. Kennedy, D. (2003). Agriculture and the Developing World. Science 302, 357. Kern, M. (2002). Food, feed, fibre, fuel and industrial products of the future: challenges and opportunities. Understanding the stategic potential of plant genetic engineering. J. Agron. Crop Sci. 188, 291-305. Mirowski, P. and Van Horn, R. (2005). The contract research organization and the commercialization of scientific research. Soc. St. Sci. 35, 503-548. Pioneer (2009). http://www.pioneer.com/web/site/portal/menuitem.63c907fefec691f7bc0c0a03d1 0093a0. Date of access: 22 February 2009. Tsegaye, B. (1997). The significance of biodiversity for sustaining agricultural production and role of women in the traditional sector: the Ethiopian experience. Agr. Ecosyst. Environ. 62, 215-227. UNDP (1999). Human Development Report 1999: Globalization with a Human Face. United Nations Development Programme. http://hdr.undp.org/en/media/hdr_1999_en.pdf. UNEP (2003). Agriculture, trade and sustainable development: an overview of some key issues. United Nations Environment Programme. http://www.unep.ch/etu/mexico/ Overview_Agri.pdf.
Page 1 and 2: Pesticides 1
Page 3 and 4: 2 Hope Not Hype Hope Not Hype The F
Page 5 and 6: 4 Hope Not Hype Chapter Seven: Biot
Page 7 and 8: vi Hope Not Hype IR kg MAB/S μg mg
Page 9 and 10: viii Hope Not Hype shrouded in laye
Page 11 and 12: x Hope Not Hype countries. Everyone
Page 13: xii Hope Not Hype might affect tens
Page 17 and 18: 2 Hope Not Hype A SYNTHESIS of the
Page 19 and 20: 4 Hope Not Hype be a technological
Page 21 and 22: 6 Hope Not Hype The selection of la
Page 23 and 24: 8 Hope Not Hype Liability The funda
Page 25 and 26: 10 Hope Not Hype The story is the s
Page 27 and 28: 12 Hope Not Hype especially concent
Page 29 and 30: 14 Hope Not Hype Conclusions The dr
Page 31 and 32: 16 Hope Not Hype Gerbens-Leenes, P.
Page 33 and 34: 18 Hope Not Hype women in the tradi
Page 35 and 36: 20 Hope Not Hype The many quotes an
Page 37 and 38: 22 Hope Not Hype The larger issue t
Page 39 and 40: 24 Hope Not Hype Unlike the public-
Page 41 and 42: 26 Hope Not Hype agree in ways that
Page 43 and 44: 28 Hope Not Hype References Coghlan
Page 45 and 46: 30 Hope Not Hype
Page 47 and 48: 32 Hope Not Hype The Assessment tex
Page 49 and 50: 34 Hope Not Hype Surprisingly, ther
Page 51 and 52: 36 Hope Not Hype
Page 53 and 54: 38 Hope Not Hype There were two sig
Page 55 and 56: 40 Hope Not Hype makes its way into
Page 57 and 58: 42 Hope Not Hype Regulations cannot
Page 59 and 60: 44 Hope Not Hype Figure 4.1: Lysine
Page 61 and 62: 46 Hope Not Hype Even if all corn p
Page 63 and 64: 48 Hope Not Hype Whether or not som
Page 65 and 66:
50 Hope Not Hype References Antoine
Page 67 and 68:
52 Hope Not Hype
Page 69 and 70:
54 Hope Not Hype The plant science
Page 71 and 72:
56 Hope Not Hype Comments such as S
Page 73 and 74:
58 Hope Not Hype nologies in Midvil
Page 75 and 76:
60 Hope Not Hype The authors of the
Page 77 and 78:
62 Hope Not Hype Tabashnik, B. E.,
Page 79 and 80:
64 Hope Not Hype So far, we do not
Page 81 and 82:
66 Hope Not Hype Does genetic engin
Page 83 and 84:
68 Hope Not Hype Bacillus producing
Page 85 and 86:
70 Hope Not Hype Box 6.1: Do insect
Page 87 and 88:
72 Hope Not Hype chemicals that can
Page 89 and 90:
74 Hope Not Hype nonetheless import
Page 91 and 92:
76 Hope Not Hype Heinemann, J. A. (
Page 93 and 94:
78 Hope Not Hype WHO (2005). Modern
Page 95 and 96:
80 Hope Not Hype The Assessment tex
Page 97 and 98:
82 Hope Not Hype adapted to tempera
Page 99 and 100:
84 Hope Not Hype either inefficient
Page 101 and 102:
86 Hope Not Hype Future productivit
Page 103 and 104:
88 Hope Not Hype The traditional sm
Page 105 and 106:
90 Hope Not Hype Critically, the pl
Page 107 and 108:
92 Hope Not Hype In places like sub
Page 109 and 110:
94 Hope Not Hype GM fish production
Page 111 and 112:
96 Hope Not Hype opportunities for
Page 113 and 114:
98 Hope Not Hype Marris, E. (2008).
Page 115 and 116:
100 Hope Not Hype either for patent
Page 117 and 118:
102 Hope Not Hype The Assessment te
Page 119 and 120:
104 Hope Not Hype The sexual flow o
Page 121 and 122:
106 Hope Not Hype From new drugs to
Page 123 and 124:
108 Hope Not Hype Figure 8.1: The g
Page 125 and 126:
110 Hope Not Hype of research...Whi
Page 127 and 128:
112 Hope Not Hype The huge proporti
Page 129 and 130:
114 Hope Not Hype BRCA genes that a
Page 131 and 132:
116 Hope Not Hype The Assessment te
Page 133 and 134:
118 Hope Not Hype Conclusions The c
Page 135 and 136:
120 Hope Not Hype Jauhar, P. P. (20
Page 137 and 138:
122 Hope Not Hype
Page 139 and 140:
124 Hope Not Hype Figure 9.1: Degre
Page 141 and 142:
126 Hope Not Hype To feed the world
Page 143 and 144:
128 Hope Not Hype
Page 145 and 146:
130 Hope Not Hype In New Zealand, t
Page 147 and 148:
132 Hope Not Hype Figure A1.1: Mole
Page 149 and 150:
134 Hope Not Hype [Generation-to-ge
Page 151 and 152:
136 Hope Not Hype Transgene RNAs wo
Page 153 and 154:
138 Hope Not Hype using an already
Page 155 and 156:
140 Hope Not Hype purposely manipul
Page 157 and 158:
142 Hope Not Hype Heinemann, J. A.
Page 159 and 160:
144 Hope Not Hype
Page 161 and 162:
146 Hope Not Hype The predominant t
Page 163 and 164:
148 Hope Not Hype References Andow,
Page 165 and 166:
150 Hope Not Hype Box A3.1: A new t
Page 167 and 168:
152 Hope Not Hype estimated to caus
Page 169 and 170:
154 Hope Not Hype 0.5% of their dai
Page 171 and 172:
156 Hope Not Hype Kroghsbo, S., Mad
Page 173 and 174:
158 Hope Not Hype developer, Aventi
Page 175 and 176:
160 Hope Not Hype References Barlet
show all

Hope Not Hype - Third World Network

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?