Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-dh8gc Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-14T06:25:47.690Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Are biotechnology and sustainable agriculture compatible?

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  30 March 2010

David E. Ervin ,
Leland L. Glenna  and
Raymond A. Jussaume Jr
David E. Ervin*
Affiliation:
Center for Sustainable Processes and Practices, Portland State University, Portland, Oregon 97201, USA.
Leland L. Glenna
Affiliation:
Department of Agricultural Economics and Rural Sociology, The Pennsylvania State University, University ParkPA 16802, USA.
Raymond A. Jussaume Jr
Affiliation:
Department of Community and Rural Sociology, Washington State University, Pullman, WA 99163, USA.
*
*Corresponding author: dervin@pdx.edu
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Agricultural biotechnology has been largely opposed by advocates in the sustainable agriculture movement, despite claims by the technology's proponents that it holds the promise to deliver both production (economic) and environmental benefits, two legs of the sustainability stool. We argue in this paper that participants in this polarized debate are talking past each other because assumptions about biotechnology and sustainability remain simplistic and poorly defined. Genetically engineered (GE) herbicide-resistant and insect-resistant crop varieties are the most visible current forms of agricultural biotechnology, and thus the form of biotechnology that many in the sustainability movement react to. However, these crops represent a biotechnology option that has paid insufficient attention to the integrated and systemic requirements of sustainable agriculture. In particular, common definitions of sustainable agriculture reinforce the need to include consideration of socio-economic distributive or equity effects into any assessment of sustainability. However, the frameworks that have been proposed to assess the potential for GE crops to enhance sustainable agriculture generally neglect this essential socio-economic dimension. We present an analysis that augments the sustainability frameworks to include the full suite of environmental, economic and social impacts. A review of the latest science on each impact category reveals that crop biotechnology cannot be fully assessed with respect to fostering a more sustainable agriculture due to key gaps in evidence, especially for socio-economic distributive effects. While the first generation of GE crops generally has made progress in reducing agriculture's environmental footprint and improving adopting farmers' economic well-being, we conclude that these early products fall short of the technology's capacity to promote a more sustainable agriculture because of the failure of those developing and promoting the technology to fully engage all stakeholders and address salient equity issues. To realize the sustainability potential of biotechnology will require fundamental changes in the way public and private research and technology development and commercialization are structured and operated. We identify new approaches in these areas that could make this powerful biological science more compatible with sustainable agriculture.

Keywords

biotechnologysustainable agricultureenvironmentaleconomicsocialsocio-economicequity
Type
Research Papers
Information
Renewable Agriculture and Food Systems , Volume 25 , Special Issue 2: “Sustainable Agriculture Systems in a Resource Limited Future” , June 2010 , pp. 143 - 157
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2010

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1Brookes, G. and Barfoot, P. 2008. GM Crops: Global Socio-Economic and Environmental Impacts 1996–2006. PG Economics Ltd, Dorchester, UK.Google Scholar
2Scientific American. 2009. Biotech's plans to sustain agriculture. Scientific American 301(4):86–94.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
3Cavatorta, J.R., Gray, S.M., and Jahn, M. 2010. Transgenic virus resistance in plants – a sustainable alternative. In Popp, J., Jahn, M., Matlock, M., and Kemper, N. (eds). The Role of Biotechnology in a Sustainable Food Supply. Cambridge University Press, New York, forthcoming.Google Scholar
4Lyson, T.A. 2002. Advanced agricultural biotechnologies and sustainable agriculture. Trends in Biotechnology 20(5):193–196.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
5Ronald, P. 2008. The New Organic. The Boston Globe, March 16. Available at Web site http://www.boston.com/bostonglobe (accessed 18 March 2010).Google Scholar
6Ronald, P. and Adamchak, R. 2008. Tomorrow's Table: Organic Farming, Genetics, and the Future of Food. Oxford University Press, New York.Google Scholar
7Nelson, G.C. and DePinto, A. 2001. GMO adoption and nonmarket effects. In Nelson, G.C. (ed.). Genetically Modified Organisms in Agriculture: Economics and Politics. Academic Press, San Diego, CA.Google Scholar
8Burros, M. 2000. U.S. Planning Tough Rules for Growing Organic Food. New York Times, March 4. Available at Web site http://www.nytimes.com (accessed 18 March 2010).Google Scholar
9Kaufmann, M. 2000. New Organic Rules Ban GE. The Washington Post, March 4. Available at Web site http://www.washingtonpost.com (accessed 18 March 2010).Google Scholar
10Jussaume, R.A. Jr and Glenna, L. 2009. Considering structural, individual and social network explanations for ecologically sustainable agriculture: an example drawn from Washington State wheat growers. Sustainability 1:120–132.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
11Naylor, R.L., Falcon, W.P., Goodman, R.M., Jahn, M.M., Sengooba, T., Tefera, H., and Nelson, R.J. 2004. Biotechnology in the developing world: a case for increased investments in orphan crops. Food Policy 29:15–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
12Avery, D.T. 1995. Saving the Planet with Pesticides and Plastic: The Envrionmental Triumph of High-Yield Farming. Hudson Institute, Indianapolis, IN.Google Scholar
13Scott, D. 2005. The magic bullet criticism of agricultural biotechnology. Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 18(3):259–267.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
14Burrows, B. 2002. Biodiversity and biotechnology. In Shiva, V. and Bedi, G. (eds). Sustainable Agriculture and Food Security: The Impact of Globalization. Sage Publications, New Delhi. p. 396–406.Google Scholar
15Altieri, M.A. and Rosset, P. 2002. Ten reasons why biotechnology will not ensure food security, protect the environment, or reduce poverty in the developing world. In Sherlock, R. and Morrey, J.D. (eds). Ethical Issues in Biotechnology. Rowman and Littlefield, Lanham, MD. p. 175–182.Google Scholar
16Rissler, J. and Mellon, M. 1996. The Ecological Risks of Engineered Crops. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.Google Scholar
17Benbrook, C. 2009. Impacts of Genetically Engineered Crops on Pesticide Use: The First Thirteen Years. The Organic Center. Available at Web site http://www.organic-center.org (accessed 18 March 2010).Google Scholar
18Thro, A.M. 2004. Europe on transgenic crops: how public plant breeding and eco-transgenics can help in the transatlantic debate. AgBioForum 7(3):142–148.Google Scholar
19Lacy, W.B., Glenna, L., Biscotti, D., and Welsh, R. 2009. Agricultural biotechnology, socioeconomic effects, and the fourth criterion. In Seidel, A. (ed.). Wiley Encyclopedia of Industrial Biotechnology. John Wiley and Sons, New York, forthcoming.Google Scholar
20Allen, P. 2004. Together at the Table: Sustainability and Sustenance in the American Agrifood System. Penn State University Press, University Park, PA.Google Scholar
21Kleinman, D.L. and Kinchy, A.J. 2003. Boundaries in science policy making: bovine growth hormone in the European Union. The Sociological Quarterly 44(4):577–595.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
22Reed, M. 2002. Fight the future! How the contemporary campaigns of the UK organic movement have arisen from their composting of the past. Sociologia Ruralis 41(1):131–145.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
23Pfeffer, M. 1992. Sustainable agriculture in historical perspective. Agriculture and Human Values 9(4):4–11.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
24National Research Council. 2003. Frontiers in Agricultural Research: Food, Health, Environment, and Communities. National Academies Press, Washington, DC.Google Scholar
25Sen, A. 1999. Development as Freedom. Anchor Books, New York.Google Scholar
26Bell, S. and Morse, S. 2006. Measuring Sustainability: Learning from Doing. Earthscan Press, London.Google Scholar
27Gold, M.V. 2009. Sustainable Agriculture: Information Access Tools. US Department of Agriculture, Alternative Farming Systems Information Center. Available at Web site http://www.nal.usda.gov (accessed 18 March 2010).Google Scholar
28Harwood, R. 1990. A history of sustainable agriculture. In Edwards, C.A., Lal, R., Madden, P., Miller, R.H., and House, G. (eds). Sustainable Agricultural Systems. Soil and Water Conservation Society, Ankeny, IA. p. 3–19.Google Scholar
29Harris, J.M. 2006. Environmental and Natural Resource Economics. 2nd ed.South Western College, Florence, KY.Google Scholar
30Pearce, D. and Barbier, E. 2000. Blueprint for a Sustainable Economy. Earthscan Press, London.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
31Daly, H.E. 1994. Beyond Growth: The Economics of Sustainable Development. Beacon Press, Boston, MA.Google Scholar
32Carrière, Y., Sisterson, M.S., and Tabashnik, B.A. 2004. Resistance management for the sustainable use of Bacillus thuringiensis in integrated pest management. In Horowitz, A.R. and Ishaaya, I. (eds). Insect Pest Management: Field and Protected Crops. Springer-Verlag, Berlin, Heidelberg. p. 65–95.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
33Welsh, R., Hubbell, B., Ervin, D., and Jahn, M. 2002. GM crops and the pesticide paradigm. Nature Biotechnology 20(6):548–549.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
34Hubbell, B. and Welsh, R. 1998. Transgenic crops: engineering a more sustainable agriculture? Agriculture and Human Values 15:43–56.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
35Baum, J.A., Bogaert, T., Clinton, W., Heck, G.R., Feldmann, P., Ilagan, O., Johnson, S., Plaetinck, G., Munyikwa, T., Pleau, M., Vaughn, T., and Roberts, J. 2007. Control of coleopteran insect pests through RNA interference. Nature Biotechnology 25(11):1322–1326.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
36USDA-NASS. 2009. Acreage. US Department of Agriculture, National Agricultural Statistics Service, Cr Pr 2–5. Available at Web site: http://usda.mannlib.cornell.edu (accessed 18 March 2010).Google Scholar
37James, C. 2008. Global Status of Commercialized Biotech/GM Crops: 2008. ISAAA, Brief No. 39 ed. ISAA, Ithaca, New York. Available at Web site http://www.isaaa.org (accessed 18 March 2010).Google Scholar
38Ervin, D., Welsh, R., Batie, S., and Carpentier, C.L. 2003. Towards an ecological systems approach in public research for environmental regulation of transgenic crops. Agriculture, Ecosystems and the Environment 99:1–14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
39Wolfenbarger, L. and Phifer, P. 2000. The ecological risks and benefits of genetically engineered plants. Science 290:288–293.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
40Fernandez-Cornejo, J., Nehring, R., Sinha, E.N., Grube, A., and Vialou, A. 2009. Assessing recent trends in pesticide use in U.S. agriculture. Presented at the Annual Meeting of the Agricultural and Applied Economics Association (AAEA). 26–28 July 2009, AAEA, Milwaukee, WI. Available at Web site: http://purl.umn.edu/49271 (accessed 18 March 2010).Google Scholar
41Fernandez-Cornejo, J. and Caswell, M.F. 2006. The First Decade of Genetically Engineered Crops in the United States. US Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service, Economic Information Bulletin No. 11. USDA, Washington, DC. Available at Web site: http://purl.access.gpo.gov (accessed 18 March 2010).Google Scholar
42Carrière, Y., Ellers-Kirk, C., Sisterson, M.S., Antilla, L., Whitlow, M., Dennehy, T.J., and Tabashnik, B.E. 2003. Long-term regional suppression of pink bollworm by Bacillus thuringiensis cotton. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 100(4):1519–1523.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
43Tabashnik, B.E., Gassmann, A.J., Crowder, D.W., and Carrière, Y. 2008. Field-evolved resistance to Bt toxins. Nature Biotechnology 26(10):1074–1076.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
44Tabashnik, B.E., Van Rensburg, J.B.J., and Carrière, Y. 2009. Field-evolved insect resistance to Bt crops: definition, theory, and data. Journal of Economic Entomology 102(6):2011–2025.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
45Fernandez-Cornejo, J. and McBride, W.D. 2002. Adoption of bioengineered crops. US Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service, Agricultural Economic Report No. 810. Available at Web site http://www.ers.usda.gov (accessed 18 March 2010).Google Scholar
46Cerdeira, A.L. and Duke, S.O. 2006. The current status and environmental impacts of glyphosate-resistant crops: a review. Journal of Environmental Quality 35(5):1633–1658.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
47Frisvold, G., Boor, A., and Reeves, J.M. 2007. Simultaneous diffusion of herbicide tolerant cotton and conservation tillage. In Proceedings of the Beltwide Cotton Conference, 12 January 2007, National Cotton Council of America, New Orleans, LA.Google Scholar
48Mensah, E.C. 2007. Economics of Technology Adoption: A Simple Approach. VDM Verlag Dr. Müller, Saarbrücken, Germany. Available at Web site: http://deposit.d-nb.de (accessed 18 March 2010).Google Scholar
49Roberts, R.K., English, B.C., Gao, Q., and Larson, J.A. 2006. Simultaneous adoption of herbicide-resistance and conservation-tillage cotton technologies. Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics 38(3):629–643.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
50Zelaya, I.A. and Owen, M.D.K. 2000. Differential response of common waterhemp (Amaranthus rudis) to glyphosate in Iowa. In Proceedings of the Weed Science Society of America. Weed Science Society of America, Toronto, Canada. p. 62–63.Google Scholar
51Culpepper, A.S., Grey, T.L., Vencill, W.K., Kichler, J.M., Webster, T.M., Brown, S.M., York, A.C., Davis, J.W., and Hanna, W.W. 2006. Glyphosate-resistant Palmer amaranth (Amaranthus palmeri) confirmed in Georgia. Weed Science 54(4):620–626.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
52Culpepper, A.S. and York, A.C. 2007. Glyphosate-resistant Palmer amaranth impacts southeastern agriculture. In Proceedings of the Illinois Crop Protection Technology Conference. University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign, Champaign, IL. Available at Web site http://ipm.illinois.edu (accessed 18 March 2010).Google Scholar
53Legleiter, T.R. and Bradley, K.W. 2008. Glyphosate and multiple herbicide resistance in common waterhemp (Amaranthus rudis) populations from Missouri. Weed Science 56(4):582–587.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
54Dauer, J.T., Luschei, E.C., and Mortensen, D.A. 2009. Effects of landscape composition on spread of an herbicide resistant weed. Landscape Ecology 24(6):735–747.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
55Mortensen, D.A., Egan, J.F., Smith, R.G., and Ryan, M. 2009. Unintended consequences of stacking herbicide tolerance traits in soybean. Presented at Working Landscapes, the Annual Meeting of the Society for Range Management, 7–10 February 2010, SRM, Denver, CO. Available at Web site http://www.srm.org (accessed 18 March 2010).Google Scholar
56Ellstrand, N.C. 2001. When transgenes wander, should we worry? Plant Physiology 125(4):1543–1545.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
57Ellstrand, N.C. 2003. Going to ‘great lengths’ to prevent the escape of genes that produce specialty chemicals. Plant Physiology 132(4):1770–1774.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
58Sasu, M.A., Ferrari, M.J., Du, D., Winsor, J.A., and Stephenson, A.G. 2009. Indirect costs of a nontarget pathogen mitigate the direct benefits of a virus-resistant transgene in wild Cucurbita. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 106(45):19067–19071.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
59James, C. 2008. Global Status of Commercialized Biotech/GM Crops. ISAAA, Ithaca, NY. Available at Web site http://www.isaaa.org (accessed 18 March 2010).Google Scholar
60Welsh, R. and Glenna, L. 2006. Considering the role of the university in conducting research on agri-biotechnologies. Social Studies of Science 36(6):929–942.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
61Piggott, N.E. and Marra, M.C. 2007. The net gain to cotton farmers of a natural refuge plan for Bollgard II® Cotton. AgBioForum 10(1):1–10.Google Scholar
62Siebert, M.W., Nolting, S., Leonard, B.R., Braxton, L.B., All, J.N., Van Duyn, J.W., Bradley, J.R., Bacheler, J., and Huckaba, R.M. 2008. Efficacy of transgenic cotton expressing CrylAc and CrylF insecticidal protein against heliothines (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae). Journal of Economic Entomology 101(6):1950–1959.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
63Fernandez-Cornejo, J., Hendricks, C., and Mishra, A.K. 2005. Technology adoption and off-farm household income: the case of herbicide-tolerant soybeans. Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics 37(3):549–563.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
64Smith, K.R. 2002. Does off-farm work hinder ‘smart’ farming? US Department of Agriculture, ERS, Agricultural Outlook, AGO-294. USDA, Washington, DC. 28–30.Google Scholar
65Ahmad, A., Wilde, G.E., Whitworth, R.J., and Zolnerowich, G. 2006. Effect of corn hybrids expressing the coleopteran-specific Cry3Bb1 protein for corn rootworm control on aboveground insect predators. Journal of Economic Entomology 99(4):1085–1095.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
66Bullock, D.S. and Nitsi, E.I. 2001. Roundup ready soybean technology and farm production costs: Measuring the incentive to adopt genetically modified seeds. American Behavioral Scientist 44(8):1283–1301.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
67Gardner, J.G. and Nelson, C.H. 2007. Genetically modified crops and labor savings in US crop production. Paper presented at the Southern Agricultural Economics Association Annual Meeting, 4–7 February 2007, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, Mobile, AL.Google Scholar
68Piggott, N.E. and Marra, M.C. 2008. Biotechnology adoption over time in the presence of non-pecuniary characteristics that directly affect utility: a derived demand approach. AgBioForum 11(1):58–70.Google Scholar
69Fernandez-Cornejo, J. 2004. The Seed Industry in U.S. Agriculture: An Exploration of Data and Information on Crop Seed Markets, Regulation, Industry Structure, and Research and Development. US Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service, Agriculture Information Bulletin No. 786. Washington, DC. Available at Web site http://www.ers.usda.gov (accessed 18 March 2010).Google Scholar
70USDA-NASS. 2009b. Data and Statistics: Quick Stats. US Department of Agriculture, NASS. Available at Web site http://www.nass.usda.gov (accessed 18 March 2010).Google Scholar
71Heffernan, W.D. 2000. Concentration of ownership and control in agriculture. In Magdoff, F., Foster, J.B., and Buttel, F.H. (eds). Hungry for Profit: The Agribusiness Threat to Farmers, Food, and the Environment. Monthly Review Press, New York. p. 61–76.Google Scholar
72McMichael, P. 2008. Development and Change: A Global Perspective. 3rd ed.Pine Forge Press, Thousand Oaks, CA.Google Scholar
73Glenna, L. 2003. Farm crisis or agricultural system crisis: defining national problems in a global economy. International Journal of Sociology of Agriculture and Food 11(1):15–30.Google Scholar
74Rubinfeld, D.L. 2001. Antitrust policy. In Smelser, N.J. and Baltes, P.B. (eds). International Encyclopedia of the Social and Behavioral Sciences. Elsevier Science Ltd, Oxford. p. 553–560.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
75Heffernan, W.H. and Constance, D.H. 1994. Transnational corporations and the globalization of the food system. In Bonanno, A., Busch, L., Friedland, W.H., Gouveia, L., and Mingione, E. (eds). From Columbus to ConAgra: The Globalization of Agriculture and Food. University of Kansas Press, Lawrence, KS. p. 29–51.Google Scholar
76Hendrickson, M. and Heffernan, W. 2007. Consolidation in the Food and Agriculture System. Report to the National Farmers Union, Washington DC. Available at Web site: http://nfu.org (accessed 18 March 2010).Google Scholar
77Boyd, W. 2003. Wonderful potencies? Deep structure and the problem of monopoly in agricultural biotechnology. In Schurman, R.A., Doyle, D., and Kelso, T. (eds). Engineering Trouble: Biotechnology and Its Discontents. University of California Press, Berkeley, CA. p. 24–62.Google Scholar
78Kloppenburg, J.R. Jr. 2004. First the Seed: The Political Economy of Plant Biotechnology: 1942 to 2000. University of Wisconsin Press, Madison, WI.Google Scholar
79Fernandez-Cornejo, J. 2009. Adoption of Genetically Engineered Crops in the U.S. US Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service. Washington, DC. Available at Web Site http://www.ers.usda.gov (accessed 18 March 2010).Google Scholar
80United Nations Conference on Trade and Development. 2006. Tracking the Trend Towards Market Concentration: The Case of the Agricultural Input Industry. United Nations, New York. Available at Web site http://www.unctad.org (accessed 18 March 2010).Google Scholar
81Davoudi, S. 2006. Monsanto Strengthens its Grip on GM Market: Group Maintains Lead as Billionth Acre goes under Cultivation. Financial Times, 16 November 2006. Available at Web site http://www.ft.com (accessed 18 March 2010).Google Scholar
82Glenna, L.L. and Cahoy, D.R. 2009. Agribusiness concentration, intellectual property, and the prospects for rural economic benefits from the emerging biofuel economy. Southern Rural Sociology 24(2):111–129.Google Scholar
83Buttel, F. 2005. Ever since Hightower: the politics of agricultural research activism in the molecular age. Agriculture and Human Values 22(3):275–283.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
84Hassanein, N. 1997. Networking knowledge in the sustainable agriculture movement: Some implications of the gender dimension. Society and Natural Resources 10:251–257.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
85Hassanein, N. 1999. Changing the Way America Farms: Knowledge and Community in the Sustainable Agriculture Movement. University of Nebraska Press, Lincoln, NE.Google Scholar
86Morgan, K. and Murdoch, J. 2000. Organic vs. conventional agriculture: knowledge, power, and innovation in the food chain. Geoforum 31:159–173.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
87Oerlemans, N. and Assouline, G. 2004. Enhancing farmers' networking strategies for sustainable development. Journal of Cleaner Production 12:469–478.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
88Kroma, M.M. 2006. Organic farmer networks: facilitating learning and innovation for sustainable agriculture. Journal of Sustainable Agriculture 28(4):5–28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
89Fazio, R.A., Rodriquez Baide, J.M., and Molnar, J.J. 2009. Barriers to the adoption of sustainable agriculture practices: Working farmer and change agent perspectives. Final Report to the Southern SARE, Department of Agricultural Economics and Rural Sociology, Auburn University, Auburn, AL, USA.Google Scholar
90Lacy, W.B. 2001. Generation and commercialization of knowledge: Trends, implications, and models for public and private agricultural research and education. In Wolf, S. and Zilberman, D. (eds). Knowledge Generation and Technical Change: Institutional Innovation in Agriculture. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Boston, MA. p. 27–54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
91Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations. 2004. The State of Food and Agriculture. Agricultural Biotechnology: Meeting the Needs of the Poor? Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, Rome, Italy.Google Scholar
92Ervin, D., Batie, S., Welsh, R., Carpentier, C.L., Fern, J., Richman, N., and Schulz, M. 2001. Transgenic crops: An environmental assessment. Policy Studies Report, Wallace Center for Agricultural and Environmental Policy. Winrock International, Washington, DC.Google Scholar
93Welsh, R., Hubbell, B., Ervin, D., and Jahn, M. 2002. GM crops and the pesticide paradigm. Nature Biotechnology 20(6):548–549.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
94National Research Council. 2001. Publicly funded agricultural research and the changing structure of U.S. agriculture. Committee to Review the Role of Publicly Funded Agriculture on the Structure of U.S. Agriculture. National Academy Press, Washington, DC.Google Scholar
95Welsh, R. and Glenna, L. 2006. Considering the role of the university in conducting agri-biotechnology research. Social Studies of Science 36:929–942.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
96Buccola, S., Ervin, D., and Yang, H. 2009. Research choice and finance in university bioscience. Southern Economic Journal 75(4):1238–1255.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
97Murphy, K., Lammer, D., Lyon, S., Carter, B., and Jones, S.S. 2005. Breeding for organic and low-input farming systems: an evolutionary–participatory breeding method for inbred cereal grains. Renewable Agriculture and Food Systems 20(1):45–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
98Ceccarelli, S. and Grando, S. 2007. Decentralized-participatory plant breeding: an example of demand driven research. Euphytica 155(3):349–360.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
99Dawson, J.C. 2008. Breeding wheat for efficient N use in low-input and organic systems in the Pacific Northwest. Unpublished Dissertation, Washington State University, Department of Crop and Soil Sciences. Washington State University, Pullman, WA.Google Scholar
100Mendum, R. and Glenna, L.L. 2010. Socioeconomic obstacles to establishing a participatory plant breeding program for organic growers in the United States. Sustainability 2:73–91.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
101Dawson, J.C. and Goldberger, J.R. 2008. Assessing farmer interest in participatory plant breeding: who wants to work with scientists? Renewable Agriculture and Food Systems 23(3):177–187.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
102Huffman, W.E., Norton, G., Traxler, G., Frisvold, G., and Foltz, J. 2006. Winners and losers: formula versus competitive funding of agricultural research. Choices 21(4):269–274.Google Scholar
103Graff, G. and Zilberman, D. 2010. Agricultural biotechnology: Equity and prosperity. In Popp, J., Jahn, M., Matlock, M., and Kemper, N. (eds). The Role of Biotechnology in a Sustainable Food Supply. Cambridge University Press, New York, forthcoming.Google Scholar
104Ervin, D. and Welsh, R. 2006. Environmental effects of genetically modified crops: differentiated risk assessment and management. In Just, R.E., Alston, J.M., and Zilberman, D. (eds). Regulating Agricultural Biotechnology: Economics and Policy. Springer Publishers, New York. p. 301–326.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
105Batie, S.S. 2008. Wicked problems and applied economics. American Journal of Agricultural Economics 90(5):1176–1191.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
106Dasgupta, P. and David, P.A. 1994. Toward a new economics of science. Research Policy 23:487–521.Google Scholar