Biotechnology, Agriculture, and the Struggle for Control
Publication Year: 2012
Published by: University of Texas Press
Title Page, Copyright
List of Acronyms
In 1996, the first genetically modified crops were commercialized in North America. Adoption of these crops was subsequently rapid in both Canada and the United States, as was the proliferation of related litigation. Just two years later, in August of 1998, the Monsanto Company brought legal action ...
1. Agricultural Biotechnologies on the Farm and around the World
While agricultural biotechnologies have brought a significant number of changes to agricultural production, such technologically induced change is not new to agriculture, of course, and is well documented in scholarly literature. Biotechnologies’ proprietary aspects add a new component to such change, ...
2. The Coming of the Third Regime? Agricultural Biotechnology Regulationin Canada and the United States
As noted in the previous chapter, Canada and the United States are the only industrialized countries with significant GM crop area (51% of global area). Outside of these, the majority of biotechnology production area is in developing countries (48% of global area), most notably Brazil, Argentina, and India. ...
3. Biotechnology on the Prairies:The Rise of Canola . . .
Bordered by Manitoba on the east and Alberta on the west, Saskatchewan is at the heart of Canada’s prairie region. The province occupies 161 million acres and has a population of almost 1 million (Government of Saskatchewan, “About”). The urban centers and the majority of Saskatchewan’s population live in the prairie southern half of the province. ...
4. . . . And the Fall of Wheat
While resistance to biotechnologies from local Saskatchewan environmental groups is low, it has pushed forth in other avenues. In addition to the resistance raised by those supportive of Schmeiser, biotechnologies have garnered sector-specific resistance from organic producers (opposed to GM crops in general) ...
5. Legal Offense and Defense on the Canadian Prairies
As we saw in Saskatchewan, biotechnologies have technological novelty; they also introduce a host of new ownership and control issues to be contended with at the farm level. Both Percy Schmeiser and the organic farmers have gone far to publicize the legal issues that accompany their introduction. ...
6. From When Cotton Was King to King Monsanto
The United States is the leader in biotechnology with respect to its early experience, its GM-dedicated acres, and its extent of adoption in key agricultural crops such as soybeans and cotton; as a whole, it is indisputably pro-biotechnology. There is considerable differentiation within it, however, given its immense geographic and cultural domain. ...
7. Starting a New Regime: Training the Locals
In the preceding chapter, we saw that the motivation for adopting GM technologies in Mississippi is strong. Whether due to the technologies’ merits, the risk of chemical drift, or the perceived relative disadvantage of competing with those who do adopt, there are very few who choose not to use GM cotton, soybeans, and, increasingly, corn. ...
Patents were created for the mutual benefit of inventors and society more broadly: through the incentive of monopoly control, they stimulate innovation, research, and development. It is a quid pro quo relationship: at the end of the patent’s term, the benefits of the invention are available for the common good. ...
Appendix: Log of Interviews
Publication Year: 2012
OCLC Number: 830023896
MUSE Marc Record: Download for Corporate Crops