Transgenic Salmon: Science, Politics, and Flawed Policy

Bailey, Conner

doi:10.1080/08941920.2015.1089610

Cited by 8 publications

(7 citation statements)

References 132 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Biotechnology has, and continues to be, the subject of much discussion pertaining to questions concerning the integration of the social and the technical. Genetic engineering (GE) technologies are rapidly changing food, medical, public health, and industrial systems (Chakradhar, 2015;Bailey, 2015;Kuzma, 2016). Products of genetic engineering are being released into the environment and agricultural systems at an increasing rate, and despite the public controversies, GE products have been a market success.…”

Section: Biotechnology Innovation and Regulationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Responsible innovation in biotechnology: Stakeholder attitudes and implications for research policy

Roberts

Herkert

Kuzma

2020

Elementa: Science of the Anthropocene

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article explores attitudes of stakeholders involved in biotechnology towards the Responsible Innovation (RI) framework. As a framework for governance, RI has received increasing scholarly attention but has yet to be successfully integrated into U.S. research and innovation policy. Using a mixed methods approach, we analyzed the attitudes of different biotechnology stakeholders, particularly those working in areas related to genetically modified organisms (GMOs) in agriculture and the environment, towards the principles and practices of RI. Homogenous focus groups (organized by stakeholder affiliation) and pre-and post-focus group surveys were used to measure attitudes towards RI. We designed the survey questions according to the Advocacy Coalition Framework (ACF) and examined the agreement of stakeholders with policy core beliefs (general principles of RI) and secondary beliefs (implementation practices of RI). Although all stakeholder groups had neutral to positive attitudes towards RI general principles, we found significant differences in their reactions to the scholarly definitions of RI and in their attitudes towards practices to implement RI. In comparison to government and advocacy groups, stakeholders promoting biotechnology innovations-industry, trade organizations, and academics-had more negative reactions to social science definitions of RI and to RI practices that relinquish control to people outside of technology development pipelines. Qualitative analysis of focus-groups revealed barriers for implementing RI practices. For example, innovators were cynical about including external voices in innovation pathways due to inflexible funding programs and were concerned about potential delays to innovation given the highly competitive environments for financing and patents. In order to help address these tensions, we call for the co-design of RI practices between biotechnology innovators and other stakeholders. The opening-up of biotechnology innovation to RI practices of anticipation, inclusion, responsiveness and reflexivity will likely be important for future, public legitimacy of emerging genetic engineering applications such as gene editing and gene drives.

show abstract

Section: Biotechnology Innovation and Regulationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Responsible innovation in biotechnology: Stakeholder attitudes and implications for research policy

Roberts

Herkert

Kuzma

2020

Elementa: Science of the Anthropocene

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…around 1.5-2 years for sea bass, 2 years for cod and 3-4 years for Atlantic salmon (European Commission, 2012a). In order to overcome this challenge, the aquaculture industry has applied several methods including (i) intensified use of inputs like more efficient feed, (ii) drugs for growth promotion purposes and hormones, (iii) changing the temperature and/or lighting of pens and/or (iv) by directly producing GMO fish (Bailey et al, 2015;Bayarri et al, 2009;Longo et al, 2015;Salze and Davis, 2015;Seas At Risk, 2015;Yamazaki, 2011). Genetic engineering and genetic modification of animal feed have already been on the scene for some decades (Sanden et al, 2004).…”

Section: Intensive Marine Aquaculturementioning

confidence: 99%

Industrial dynamics on the commodity frontier: Managing time, space and form in mining, tree plantations and intensive aquaculture

Banoub

Bridge

Bustos

et al. 2020

Environment and Planning E: Nature and Space

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Research in political ecology and agrarian political economy has shown how commodity frontiers are constituted through the appropriation and transformation of nature. This work identifies two broad processes of socio-metabolism associated with commodity frontiers: the spatial extension of nature appropriation, via expanding territorial claims to the control and use of natural resources and associated acts of dispossession (commodity-widening); and the intensification of appropriation at existing sites, through socio-technical innovation and the growing capitalisation of production (commodity-deepening). While sympathetic, we have reservations about reducing frontier metabolism to either one or the other of these processes. We argue for more grounded examinations of how non-human nature is actively reconstituted at commodity frontiers, attuned to the diverse and specific ways in which socio-ecological processes are harnessed to dynamics of accumulation. To achieve this, we compare strategies of appropriation in three sectors often associated with the commodity frontier: gold mining, tree plantations and intensive aquaculture. In doing so, we bring research on capitalism as an ecological regime into conversation with work on the industrial dynamics of ‘nature-facing’ sectors. By harnessing the analytical categories of time, space and form adopted by research on industrial dynamics, we (i) show how strategies of commodity-widening and commodity-deepening are shaped in significant ways by the biophysical characteristics of these sectors; and (ii) identify a third strategy, beyond commodity-widening and commodity-deepening, that involves the active reconstitution of socio-ecological systems – we term this ‘commodity-transformation’.

show abstract

“…Opposing groups used environmental frames to talk about threats to wild salmon populations if the transgenic fish should accidentally escape into the wild, reproduce, and compete with native species (FDA ). They pointed to the scientific uncertainty regarding the inherent fitness of AquaAdvantage in the event of escape, and especially in the event of theft of the eggs or in production scenarios and geographic locations beyond the facility evaluated by the VMAC (Bailey ; Center for Food Safety ). They criticized the agency for limiting its review to the particular sites in Panama where AquaBounty plans to begin production of the fish because these represent a proof‐of‐concept operation, not the larger facilities required for commercial success.…”

Section: Discourses Used In Support Of and Opposition To Ge Salmonmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Analyzing the discourses used in GE regulatory debates is important because despite many studies dedicated to improving communication about biotechnology with the public, consumers are more wary than ever (Kopicki ). The FDA's decision is important because it sets the precedent for several other genetically engineered animals pending approval (Bailey ).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The FDA's decision to evaluate the fish as an animal drug meant that it followed strict confidentiality requirements and could not provide the public with the technical information used to evaluate the fish until less than two weeks before the meeting (Bailey ; FDA ). Opposing groups criticized the agency for withholding information from the public, relying on company data for its assessment, and using what they believed was an inappropriate framework for evaluation of the salmon as a drug rather than a food product (Food and Water Watch , , ; Laskawy , ; Richardson ).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Frankenfish or Fish to Feed the World? Scientism and Biotechnology Regulatory Policy

Bruce

2016

Rural Sociology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Scientism is an attempt to apply the methods and approach of the natural sciences to matters of human social and political concern. Scientism‐based discourse has been used to reframe the public debate about controversial science and technology into a risk assessment carried out by experts. The biotechnology industry has used a scientism‐based discourse to avoid regulation and labeling, claiming that the scientific makeup of their products is all that matters for governing regulatory policy, not their social, economic, or environmental impact. In this case study I examine the discourse used in support of and opposition to AquaAdvantage salmon, the first genetically engineered animal approved for human consumption. This case inspired an opposition coalition of consumer and environmental groups that led the FDA to organize a public meeting about its review of the fish. The analysis finds support for previous studies showing that regulatory debates over biotechnology in the United States are dominated by scientism, and that scientism generates public skepticism rather than confidence. In previous cases citizen groups were unable to challenge the authority of scientism‐based regulatory policy, but in this case the agency's decision not to require labeling was overruled by a congressional labeling mandate driven by citizen mobilization.

show abstract

Transgenic Salmon: Science, Politics, and Flawed Policy

Cited by 8 publications

References 132 publications

Responsible innovation in biotechnology: Stakeholder attitudes and implications for research policy

Responsible innovation in biotechnology: Stakeholder attitudes and implications for research policy

Industrial dynamics on the commodity frontier: Managing time, space and form in mining, tree plantations and intensive aquaculture

Frankenfish or Fish to Feed the World? Scientism and Biotechnology Regulatory Policy

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About