Search

Search Results

• 1. [Article] The Theory and Practice of Genetically Engineered Crops and Agricultural Sustainability

  The development of genetically engineered (GE) crops has focused predominantly on enhancing conventional pest control approaches. Scientific assessments show that these GE crops generally deliver significant ...

  Citation × Citation Citation Abstract Copy Title: The Theory and Practice of Genetically Engineered Crops and Agricultural Sustainability Author: Ervin, David E., Glenna, Leland L., Jussaume, Raymond Adelard Year: 2011 The development of genetically engineered (GE) crops has focused predominantly on enhancing conventional pest control approaches. Scientific assessments show that these GE crops generally deliver significant economic and some environmental benefits over their conventional crop alternatives. However, emerging evidence indicates that current GE crops will not foster sustainable cropping systems unless the negative environmental and social feedback effects are properly addressed. Moreover, GE crop innovations that promote more sustainable agricultural systems will receive underinvestment by seed and chemical companies that must understandably focus on private returns for major crops. Opportunities to promote crops that convey multi-faceted benefits for the environment and the poor are foundational to a sustainable food system and should not be neglected because they also represent global public goods. In this paper, we develop a set of criteria that can guide the development of GE crops consistent with contemporary sustainable agriculture theory and practice. Based on those principles, we offer policy options and recommendations for reforming public and private R&D and commercialization processes to further the potential contributions of GE crops to sustainable agriculture. Two strategies that would help achieve this goal would be to restore the centrality of the public sector in agricultural R&D and to open the technology development process to more democratic participation by farmers and other stakeholders. Title: The Theory and Practice of Genetically Engineered Crops and Agricultural Sustainability Author: Ervin, David E., Glenna, Leland L., Jussaume, Raymond Adelard Year: 2011 The development of genetically engineered (GE) crops has focused predominantly on enhancing conventional pest control approaches. Scientific assessments show that these GE crops generally deliver significant economic and some environmental benefits over their conventional crop alternatives. However, emerging evidence indicates that current GE crops will not foster sustainable cropping systems unless the negative environmental and social feedback effects are properly addressed. Moreover, GE crop innovations that promote more sustainable agricultural systems will receive underinvestment by seed and chemical companies that must understandably focus on private returns for major crops. Opportunities to promote crops that convey multi-faceted benefits for the environment and the poor are foundational to a sustainable food system and should not be neglected because they also represent global public goods. In this paper, we develop a set of criteria that can guide the development of GE crops consistent with contemporary sustainable agriculture theory and practice. Based on those principles, we offer policy options and recommendations for reforming public and private R&D and commercialization processes to further the potential contributions of GE crops to sustainable agriculture. Two strategies that would help achieve this goal would be to restore the centrality of the public sector in agricultural R&D and to open the technology development process to more democratic participation by farmers and other stakeholders. Close

• 2. [Article] Genetically Engineering Crops for a Sustainable Agriculture

  The article examines the role of genetically engineered (GE) crops in fostering a more sustainable agriculture. An overview of the National Academy of Sciences metal study of the impacts of GE crops on ...

  Citation × Citation Citation Abstract Copy Title: Genetically Engineering Crops for a Sustainable Agriculture Author: Ervin, David E., Welsh, Rick Year: 2010 The article examines the role of genetically engineered (GE) crops in fostering a more sustainable agriculture. An overview of the National Academy of Sciences metal study of the impacts of GE crops on farm sustainability in the U.S. is given. The two types of GE crops are discussed, one which produces its own insecticide called insect resistant (IR) crops and the other is engineered to resist particular herbicides. An explanation for sustainable agriculture is also presented. Title: Genetically Engineering Crops for a Sustainable Agriculture Author: Ervin, David E., Welsh, Rick Year: 2010 The article examines the role of genetically engineered (GE) crops in fostering a more sustainable agriculture. An overview of the National Academy of Sciences metal study of the impacts of GE crops on farm sustainability in the U.S. is given. The two types of GE crops are discussed, one which produces its own insecticide called insect resistant (IR) crops and the other is engineered to resist particular herbicides. An explanation for sustainable agriculture is also presented. Close

• 3. [Article] Transgenic Crops: An Environmental Assessment

  The report focuses on the environmental impacts of transgenic crops, and covers biosafety regulations in the US and EU, intellectual property rights, and market and trade developments.

  Citation × Citation Citation Abstract Copy Title: Transgenic Crops: An Environmental Assessment Author: Ervin, David E., Batie, Sandra S., Welsh, Rick, Carpentier, Chantal L., Fern, Jacqueline I., Richman, Nessa J., Schulz, Mary A. Year: 2000 The report focuses on the environmental impacts of transgenic crops, and covers biosafety regulations in the US and EU, intellectual property rights, and market and trade developments. Title: Transgenic Crops: An Environmental Assessment Author: Ervin, David E., Batie, Sandra S., Welsh, Rick, Carpentier, Chantal L., Fern, Jacqueline I., Richman, Nessa J., Schulz, Mary A. Year: 2000 The report focuses on the environmental impacts of transgenic crops, and covers biosafety regulations in the US and EU, intellectual property rights, and market and trade developments. Close

• 4. [Article] Transgenic Crops and the Environment: Missing Markets and Public Roles

  The rapidity of change has left scant opportunity for investigation of the consequences of adoption of transgenic crops on long-term ecosystem or economic system functioning. Economic theory suggests that, ...

  Citation × Citation Citation Abstract Copy Title: Transgenic Crops and the Environment: Missing Markets and Public Roles Author: Ervin, David E., Batie, Sandra S. Year: 2001 The rapidity of change has left scant opportunity for investigation of the consequences of adoption of transgenic crops on long-term ecosystem or economic system functioning. Economic theory suggests that, if the "Biotechnology Revolution" is left to market forces alone, there will be neglected public goods. Theory and limited empirical evidence suggests that there are significant incentives for private firms to discount and neglect certain environmental impacts and to develop products that meet mainly the needs of those able and willing to pay. Negative distributional impacts on rural societies and economies will not normally enter the private calculus nor will the long-term problems of insect and plant resistance. Thus, there is a strong case for enhanced public roles with respect to the use of transgenic crops. The adoption of the precautionary approach in public policies addressing transgenic crops is one alternative to better reflect public concerns. Title: Transgenic Crops and the Environment: Missing Markets and Public Roles Author: Ervin, David E., Batie, Sandra S. Year: 2001 The rapidity of change has left scant opportunity for investigation of the consequences of adoption of transgenic crops on long-term ecosystem or economic system functioning. Economic theory suggests that, if the "Biotechnology Revolution" is left to market forces alone, there will be neglected public goods. Theory and limited empirical evidence suggests that there are significant incentives for private firms to discount and neglect certain environmental impacts and to develop products that meet mainly the needs of those able and willing to pay. Negative distributional impacts on rural societies and economies will not normally enter the private calculus nor will the long-term problems of insect and plant resistance. Thus, there is a strong case for enhanced public roles with respect to the use of transgenic crops. The adoption of the precautionary approach in public policies addressing transgenic crops is one alternative to better reflect public concerns. Close

• 5. [Article] Are Biotechnology and Sustainable Agriculture Compatible?

  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 ...

  Citation × Citation Citation Abstract Copy Title: Are Biotechnology and Sustainable Agriculture Compatible? Author: Ervin, David E., Glenna, Leland L., Jussaume, Raymond Adelard Year: 2010 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. Title: Are Biotechnology and Sustainable Agriculture Compatible? Author: Ervin, David E., Glenna, Leland L., Jussaume, Raymond Adelard Year: 2010 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. Close

• 6. [Article] What Drives Academic Bioscientists: Money or Values?

  The article determines the factors that drive academic bioscience to better understand the role of genetically engineered (GE) crops in the sustainability of U.S. agriculture. Some challenges brought about ...

  Citation × Citation Citation Abstract Copy Title: What Drives Academic Bioscientists: Money or Values? Author: Ervin, David E., Nag, Sharmistha, Yang, Hui, Buccola, Steven T. Year: 2010 The article determines the factors that drive academic bioscience to better understand the role of genetically engineered (GE) crops in the sustainability of U.S. agriculture. Some challenges brought about by GE crops in the U.S. farm sustainability include tracking and controlling water pollution, protecting against herbicide resistance and nitrogen fixation. Professional norms are also considered as a great factor driving the academic bioscience. Title: What Drives Academic Bioscientists: Money or Values? Author: Ervin, David E., Nag, Sharmistha, Yang, Hui, Buccola, Steven T. Year: 2010 The article determines the factors that drive academic bioscience to better understand the role of genetically engineered (GE) crops in the sustainability of U.S. agriculture. Some challenges brought about by GE crops in the U.S. farm sustainability include tracking and controlling water pollution, protecting against herbicide resistance and nitrogen fixation. Professional norms are also considered as a great factor driving the academic bioscience. Close