The sociology of natural resources and the environment constitutes a major field of inquiry in the research on human–environmental interactions. A constructive debate and dialogue on the relationships between environmental sociology (ES) and the sociology of natural resources (SNR) began at the 2000 International Symposium on Society and Resource Management (ISSRM) in Bellingham, Washington. Frederick Buttel argued that the two subdisciplines had different subject matters, levels of analysis, spatial focuses, theoretical orientations, policy relevance, and interdisciplinary commitments. These distinctive tendencies have been widely accepted in environmental and natural resource social science but have not been systematically analyzed. The primary objective of this research is to conduct an empirical test of Buttel's differentiating criteria through a systematic review of sample American sociological journal articles published in 2000 and 2014. The multivalue qualitative comparative analysis revealed that there was no clear‐cut divide between the two subfields regarding the combinations of empirical research characteristics, while the general tendencies within both of them became more diverse over time. The overall lack of empirical research evidence for rigid ES–SNR distinctions also indicates that there is more potential than typically realized to build an integrative environmental and resource sociology in the American context and beyond.

No abstract

This dissertation seeks to address specific questions: the extent to which SD informs proponents of GE benefits, how farmers' practices are included in GE proponents' arguments, and the applicability of the claim that the EU pressures the developing world, and Morocco in particular, to reject GE technology. This dissertation seeks to contribute to both academic and policy discussion on GE crops within the context of African food security. While one is considered globally embraced and the other globally controversial, sustainable development (SD) and agricultural genetic engineering (GE) technology are both examined in this dissertation. The dissertation engages with how proponents of genetic engineering (GE) technology argue for its capacity to benefit sustainable development (SD) in the context of African food security. Three sources of information constitute the basis of analysis and discussion. First, meta-analysis and systematic review of peer-reviewed articles and policy studies which argue for SD benefits gained through GE technology within the context of African food security. Second, taking Morocco as a case study, this dissertation uses both interviews and policy analysis to understand how sustainable development informs policy and academic discussion on GE technology. Third, discussions and observations in national and international conferences have been key to build connections between the examined studies and the networks of their authors. The opportunity to interact with these authors has been tremendously beneficial, both to learn about the policy significance of the examined studies, and to understand the research and policy networks of the authors. Arguments supporting SD benefits of GE technology are examined in four stages. In the first stage, I apply the reviewed theoretical and methodological approaches to examine the studies which argue for SD benefits of GE crops. This stage helps identify the major trends of the reviewed Agricultural GE and Sustainable Development in the African Context studies. In the second stage, I focus on SD benefits of GE crops and African farmers. In this stage, I present an elaborate list of SD benefits of GE crops as argued by the examined studies; I also critique these studies. In the third stage, I critique how GE proponents portray SD social benefits in the examined studies. In the fourth stage, I test the prevalent claim about the EU pressure on African countries to reject GE technology, taking Morocco as a case study.