Governing Agricultural Biotechnologies in the United States, the United Kingdom, and Germany: A Trans-decadal Study of Regulatory Cultures

Ely, Adrian; Friedrich, Beate; Glover, Dominic; Fischer, Klara; Stone, Geoffrey R.; Kingiri, Ann; Schnurr, Matthew A.

doi:10.1177/01622439221122513

Cited by 3 publications

(1 citation statement)

References 67 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…And, unlike the US, which saw substantial market consolidation after the introduction of transgenic crops, the EU still has many small breeding companies (Brandl & Glenna, 2017). Furthermore, research indicates that national research cultures and opportunity structures governing agricultural biotechnologies are more dynamic than often portrayed (Ely et al, 2022). The point is that the future of gene editing in agriculture in the EU is still unfolding.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Are intellectual property policies for gene‐edited crops fit for purpose? The perspectives of German scientists

Glenna

2023

Plants People Planet

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Societal Impact StatementA growing body of research indicates that intellectual property policies for agricultural biotechnologies are hindering research and limiting the use of the technologies. Research also indicates that public resistance to agricultural biotechnologies, including transgenic and gene‐edited crops, is at least in part motivated by concerns about intellectual property restrictions. Therefore, changing the policies governing agricultural biotechnologies promises to reduce public resistance and to enhance the diffusion of research outputs. Because so many patents related to gene editing are held by universities and because so much cutting‐edge research is conducted by public scientists, exploring the scientists' perspectives on these policies offers insights into possibilities for policy changes.Summary After the European Court of Justice's ruling that gene‐edited crops would be regulated the way transgenic crops are regulated, the European Commission consulted with stakeholders and concluded that policies governing gene‐edited crops are not fit for purpose. This research explores whether public scientists in Germany also consider intellectual property policies not fit for purpose. The data come from intensive interviews with 10 scientists working at German universities and research institutes. The interviewed scientists describe how intellectual property policies limited the use of transgenic breeding techniques and how they now limit applications of gene‐editing techniques. They overwhelmingly support policy changes that facilitate the use of their scientific breakthroughs to solve problems in the world, and they do not want to see large companies use the technologies to consolidate economic power or to profit at the expense of solving problems. Because intellectual property policies are often cited as a key reason for the resistance to agricultural biotechnologies and because research indicates that current policies are not enhancing crop innovations or social welfare, a change in intellectual property policies is likely to reduce resistance to the new crop breeding technologies and yield more social benefits.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Are intellectual property policies for gene‐edited crops fit for purpose? The perspectives of German scientists

Glenna

2023

Plants People Planet

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Sociotechnical imaginaries of gene editing in food and agriculture: A comparative content analysis of mass media in the United States, New Zealand, Japan, the Netherlands, and Canada

Das,

Cordoba,

Kristiansen

et al. 2024

Public Underst Sci

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Sociotechnical imaginaries of gene editing in food and agriculture reflect and shape culturally particular understandings of what role technology should play in an ideal agrifood future. This study employs a comparative media content analysis to identify sociotechnical imaginaries of agricultural gene editing and the actors who perform them in five countries with contrasting regulatory and cultural contexts: Canada, Japan, New Zealand, the Netherlands, and the United States. We find that news media in these countries reinforce a predominantly positive portrayal of the technology’s future, although variations in which imaginaries are most mobilized exist based on the regulatory status of gene editing and unique histories of civil society engagement around biotechnology in each country. We argue that by granting legitimacy to some narratives over others, the media supports gene editing as a desirable and necessary component of future agrifood systems, thereby limiting consideration of broader issues related to the technology’s development and application.

show abstract

The knowledge politics of genome editing in Africa

Rock,

Schnurr,

Kingiri

et al. 2023

Elem Sci Anth

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

How is the promise of crop genome editing viewed by scientists working with or aspiring to work with the technology, by development experts seeking to mold public perceptions and policy attitudes toward genome editing, and by donors that provide funds for genome-editing research for agricultural applications in sub-Saharan Africa? In this article, we present data from interviews with these stakeholders to shed light on their aspirations, concerns, and expectations. Previous scholarship on genome editing in relation to African agriculture has focused on the technical capabilities of genome editing techniques and surveys of current research and development activities in this field. This article contextualizes and reflects critically on expectations that genome editing can or will deliver benefits for African scientists and farmers. The interviews reveal excitement around genome editing and anticipation for what it could achieve, but also a sober realism and frustration regarding the political-economic hurdles that constrain African scientists and research institutions and the generation of public goods for African farmers and societies. These insights, we show, challenge extant narratives related to genome editing and accessibility. As such, we center and interrogate the politics of knowledge surrounding the emergence of genome editing in Africa.

show abstract

Governing Agricultural Biotechnologies in the United States, the United Kingdom, and Germany: A Trans-decadal Study of Regulatory Cultures

Cited by 3 publications

References 67 publications

Are intellectual property policies for gene‐edited crops fit for purpose? The perspectives of German scientists

Are intellectual property policies for gene‐edited crops fit for purpose? The perspectives of German scientists

Sociotechnical imaginaries of gene editing in food and agriculture: A comparative content analysis of mass media in the United States, New Zealand, Japan, the Netherlands, and Canada

The knowledge politics of genome editing in Africa

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About