Location, location, location: Presenting evidence for genetically modified crops

Morse, Stephen; Mannion, Antoinette M.; Evans, C.S.

doi:10.1016/j.apgeog.2011.08.015

Cited by 6 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 34 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In such circumstances GM varieties can provide a degree of insurance for the farmers in that they may help to stabilize outputs in the face of environmental uncertainty given that the farmers have to commit inputs such as land and labour. These and other studies are discussed by Morse et al (2012).…”

Section: Agronomic Considerationsmentioning

confidence: 76%

“…However, it must be pointed out that a true assessment is hampered by misused and poorly reported data. This has been highlighted by Morse et al (2012) in relation to economic advantages. In addition Waltz (2009) has highlighted problems of reporting potential adverse impacts of GM crops on organisms while there is an uncharted belief that it is easier to have work relating to adverse impacts rather than positive outcomes published.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Biotechnology in agriculture

Mannion

Morse

2012

Progress in Physical Geography: Earth and Environment

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Genetically-modified (GM) varieties of crops, notably soybean, maize, rape (canola) and cotton were first grown commercially in 1996. In 2010 they occupied 148 million ha in 29 countries, mostly in the Americas and Asia but with an obvious absence in Europe where their introduction has been controversial due to concerns about environmental impairment and adverse impacts on human health. This paper reviews the published literature on the agronomic and environmental impact of GM crops in the last 15 years (a related paper by Morse and Mannion reviews the socio-economic impact). Overall, the impact of GM crops has largely been agronomically and environmentally positive in both developed and developing world contexts. The often claimed negative impacts of GM crops have yet to materialise on large scales in the field. Agronomically, there have been yield increases per unit area, mainly due to reduced losses as a result of improved pest i.e. insect and weed control; in the case of conventional crops grown near GM varieties with insect resistance 2 there have been benefits due to the so-called 'halo' effect. Environmentally, the decrease in insecticide use has benefitted non-target and beneficial organisms while surface and groundwater contamination is less significant; human-health problems related to pesticide use have also declined. Equally important is the reduced carbon footprint as energy inputs are reduced. Of particular note, however, is the recognition that the success or longevity of GM crops is reliant on the speed with which resistance develops in target weeds and insects.However, resistance to GM-based plant resistance is already being detected in some pest populations and this suggests that scientists and farmers cannot be complacent. Current GM approaches are relatively transitory as a means of combating pests, as are conventional pesticides, and good management will determine how long this strategy proves positive.However, GM is a comparatively new science and the possibilities are considerable.

show abstract

Section: Agronomic Considerationsmentioning

confidence: 76%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Biotechnology in agriculture

Mannion

Morse

2012

Progress in Physical Geography: Earth and Environment

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…7 For instance, it is Stone -not the agricultural economists he is criticizing -who observes the ways in which farmers protect their expensive investment in GM seeds. Likewise, it might be argued that the statistical methods used in these studies -t-test comparisons of arithmetic means between GM and non-GM plots, and linear regression models, for example -are inadequate for examining the role of support factors (Morse, Mannion, and Evans 2012).…”

Section: To Feed the Worldmentioning

confidence: 99%

Epistemological depth in a GM crops controversy

Hicks

2015

Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part C: Studies in

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper examines the scientific controversy over the yields of genetically modified [GM] crops as a case study in EPISTEMOLOGICALLY DEEP disagreements. Appeals to "the evidence" are inadequate to resolve such disagreements; not because the interlocutors have radically different metaphysical views (as in cases of incommensurability), but instead because they assume rival epistemological frameworks and so have incompatible views about what kinds of research methods and claims count as evidence. Specifically, I show that, in the yield debate, proponents and opponents of GM crops cite two different sets of claims as evidence, which correspond to two rival epistemological frameworks, classical experimental epistemology and Nancy Cartwright's evidence for use. I go on to argue that, even if both sides of the debate accepted Cartwright's view, they might still disagree over what counts as evidence, because evidence for use ties standards of evidence to what is sometimes called the "context of application."

show abstract

“…environmental benefits, being cited by the selected studies which argue explicitly for SD benefits of GM crops. More importantly some of these cited authors themselves have published articles arguing explicitly for SD benefits: for example (Morse, Mannion, and Evans 2012), Gouse in his thesis (Gouse 2004), (Piesse and Thirtle 2009), and (Sexton et al 2009). I elaborate below on how these cited authors were selected and describe their disciplinary backgrounds and analytical methods: see section (Influencers).…”

Section: Sample Choicementioning

confidence: 99%

“…An unprecedented skepticism arose towards the safety and sustainability of newly developed agricultural technologies, namely biotechnology. Debunking this arguably unfounded skepticism toward the potential benefits of biotechnology to agricultural sustainability has constituted the main avenue of research for various researchers (Borlaug 2000;Morse et al 2012;Trewavas 2008). Second, various scholars have argued for the contributions of biotechnology to attain sustainable agriculture (Juma 2011c;Ronald and Adamchak 2008).…”

Section: A) Past Research On Pro-biotechnology Groups In Africamentioning

confidence: 99%

Agricultural genetic engineering technology and sustainable development in the African food security context

Dguidegue¹

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

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.

show abstract

Location, location, location: Presenting evidence for genetically modified crops

Cited by 6 publications

References 34 publications

Biotechnology in agriculture

Biotechnology in agriculture

Epistemological depth in a GM crops controversy

Agricultural genetic engineering technology and sustainable development in the African food security context

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About