Factors in the failure of the scientific community to properly oversee agricultural transgenics are presented. The large-scale restructuring of university science programs in the past 25 years from a model based on non-proprietary science for the ‘public good’ to the ‘academic capitalism’ model based on the ‘knowledge economy’ is discussed in the context of the failure of the science community to oversee the transition of transgenic crop technology from the research stage to commercialization. Discussed are increasing science community and university dependence on private industry funding and on development of proprietary technologies; monopolization of the make-up of expert scientific bodies on transgenics by pro-industry scientists with vested interests in transgenics; deficient scientific protocols, bias, and possible fraud in industry-sponsored and industry-conducted research; increasing politically and commercially driven manipulation of science within federal regulatory bodies such as the FDA; and bias in the peer-review process, tolerance by the scientific community of biotechnology industry manipulation of the information environment, and of biased treatment and harassment of non-compliant scientists. Discussed are future food production strategies for developing countries, recently framed in the 2008 UNsponsored International Assessment of Agricultural Knowledge, Science, and Technology, an action plan that emphasizes non-proprietary, agroecology-based approaches to food production and does not include crop transgenics as a central strategy. The under-funding of non-proprietary agroecological approaches to food production is discussed.
How to Cite
AFrICAn Centre For BIoSAFetY (2007) Monsanto’s Genetically Modified Drought Tolerant Maize in South Africa.
African Centre for Biosafety, 1 May, published online
ArGYreS, n. and LIeBeSKInD, J.P. (1998) Privatizing the intellectual commons: universities and the commercialization of biotechnology, Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization, 35, pp. 427–454
BADGLeY C., MoGHtADer, J., QUIntero, e., ZAKeM, e., CHAPPeLL, J., AVILéS-VáZQUeZ, K., SAMULon, A. and PerFeCto, I. (2007) organic agriculture and the global food supply, Renewable Agriculture and Food Systems, 22(2), pp. 86–124.
BArDoCZ, S. and PUSZtAI, A. (2006) GMo in animal nutrition: potential benefits and risks, in: r. MoSentHIn, J. ZenteK, and t. ZeBroWSKA (eds) Biology of Nutrition in Growing Animals. edinburgh: elsevier.
BBC neWS (2006) Wheat’s Lost Gene Helps Nutrition. BBC news, published online
BeKeLMAn, J.e., LI, Y. and GroSS, C.P. (2003) Scope and impact of financial conflicts of interest in biomedical research, JAMA, 289, pp. 454–465.
BHAnDArI, n. (2007) Optimal Pesticide Use Can Save Cotton Farmers. Inter-Press news Service, 7 June, published onlne
BIoSCIenCe reSoUrCe ProJeCt (2007) Does the Knowledge-based Bio-economy Add Up? Bioscience resource Project Commentaries, 10 June 10, published online
BIotHAI, CeDAC, DrCSC, GrAIn, MASIPAG, PAn-InDoneSIA and UBInIG (2001) Grains of Delusion: Golden Rice Seen from the Ground. GrAIn briefing, 25 Feb., published online
BoK, D. (2003) Universities in the Marketplace: The Commercialization of Higher Education. Princeton, nJ: Princeton University Press.
BrenneMAn, r. (2006) GMo research dominates BP-UC partnership, The Berkeley Daily Planet, 6 Mar.
BreSSLer, n.M., LIeSeGAnG, t.J., SCHACHAt, A.P. andALBert, D.M. (2004) Advantages and potential dangers of presentation before publication, Archives of Ophthalmology, 122, pp. 1045–1048.
BUnCH, r. (2002). Increasing productivity through agroecological approaches in Central America: experiences from hillside agriculture, in: n. UPHoFF (ed.) Agroecological Innovations: Increasing Food Production with Farmer Participation. London: earthscan, pp. 162–72.
BUSCH, L., LACY, W., BUrKHArDt, J. and LACY, L. (1991) Plants, Power, and Profit: Social, Economic, and Ethical onsequences of the New Biotechnologies. Cambridge, MA: Blackwell Publishers.
BUSH, V. (1945) Science – The Endless Frontier: A Report to the President on a Program for Post-war Scientific Research. Washington, DC: national Science Foundation.
Center For FooD SAFetY (2006) Market Rejection of Genetically Engineered Foods. Center for Food Safety newsletter, nov., published online
CUMMInS, J., Ho, M.-W., SAUnDerS, P. et al. (2008) Open Letter to British Food Journal Editor & Editorial Board: Wormy Corn Paper Must be Retracted. Institute of Science in Society press release, 23 Jan., published online
DALton, r. (2008) Modified genes spread to local maize: findings reignite debate over genetically modified crops, Nature, 456(7219), p. 149.
DoMInGo, J.L. (2007) toxicity studies of genetically modified plants: a review of the published literature, Critical Reviews in Food Science and Nutrition, 47(8), pp. 721–733.
etZKoWItZ, H. (2005) the rise of the entrepreneurial university, International Journal of Contemporary Sociology, (42)1, pp. 28–43.
eWen, S.W.B. and PUSZtAI, A. (1999) effect of diets containing genetically modified potatoes expressing Galanthus nivalis lectin on rat small intestine, The Lancet, 354, pp. 1353–1354.
FAo (FooD AnDAGrICULtUre orGAnIZAtIon) (2007) International Conference on Organic Agriculture and Food Security. Un Food and Agriculture organization report, oFS/2007/reP. 3–5 May. rome: FAo.
GASKeLL, G., BAUer, M.W., DUrAnt, J. and ALLUM, n.C. (1999) Worlds apart? the reception of genetically modified foods in europe and the U.S, Science, 285: pp. 384–387.
GeneWAtCH (2007) Editor admits to serious errors of judgement. Genewatch press release, 12 Aug., published online
GM WAtCH (2002a) Prakash Admits AgBioWorld Bastard Child of ‘Well-funded Front for Corporations’. GM Watch press release, 3 June, published online
GM WAtCH (2002b) Row over GM Crops: Mexican Scientist Tells Newsnight He Was Threatened Because He Wanted to Tell the Truth. GM Watch press release, 7 June, published online
GM WAtCH (2007) Pew-USDA Report Intended to Weaken GM Regulation. GM Watch press release, 3 April, published online
Ho, M.W., CUMMInS, J., and SAUnDerS, P.t. (2007) GM food nightmare unfolding in the regulatory sham, Microbial Ecology in Health and Disease, 19(2), pp. 66–77.
HoLLAnD, J.M., FrAMPton, G.K., CILGI, t. and WrAtten, S.D. (1994) Arable acronyms analysed: a review of integrated arable farming systems research in western europe, Annals of Applied Biology, 125(2), pp. 399–438.
IAAStD (International Assessment of Agricultural Knowledge, Science and technology for Development) (2008) executive Summary of the Synthesis report. IAAStD, published online
JAKUBYSZYn, C. and KeMPF, H. (2007) La France s’oriente vers un gel des cultures d’oGM, Le Monde, 20 Sept.
JAMeS, J. (2004) Consumer knowledge and acceptance of agricultural biotechnology vary, California Agriculture, 58(2), pp. 99–105.
KAISer, J. (2000) Agricultural research: windfall breeds fresh but vulnerable crop of grants, Science, 287, p. 402.
KAnter, J. (2007) eU officials propose ban on genetically modified corn seeds, International Herald Tribune, 21 nov.
KIrBY, A. (2002) Doubts over Mexican GM maize report. BBC news, 14 April, published online
KLeInMAn, D.L. (2003) Impure Cultures: University Biology and the World of Commerce. Madison, WI: University of Wisconsin Press.
KnUDSon, t. and Lee, M. (2004) Biotech industry funds bumper crop of UC Davis research, Sacramento Bee, 8 June.
KrIMSKY, S. (2003) Science in the Private Interest: Has the Lure of Profits Corrupted Biomedical Research? Lanham, MD: rowman and Littlefield.
LAIDLAW, S. (2003) Secret Ingredients: The Brave New World of Industrial Farming. toronto: McClelland & Stewart.
LAtHAM, J.r., WILSon, A.K. and SteInBreCHer, r.A. (2006) the mutational consequences of plant transformation, Journal of Biomedicine and Biotechnology, 2006, pp. 1–7.
LeAHY, S. (2007) GE Crops Slow to Gain Global Acceptance. Inter Press Service, 10 Jan, published online
LeonArD, A. (2007) Transgenic public relations: Why is it so hard? Salon.com, 11 Sept., published online
LeSSer, L.I., eBBeLInG, C.B., GooZner, M., WYPIJ, D. and LUDWIG, D.S. (2007) relationship between funding source and conclusion among nutrition-related scientific articles, PLoS Medicine, 4(1), e5.
LItteK, M. (n.d.) Marina Littek of Italy’s Green Planet interviews Jonathan Matthews of GM Watch. GM Watch, published online
LoPeZ VILLAr, J., FreeSe, A., BeBB, A., BASSeY, n., AMénDoLA, C. and FerreIrA, M. (2007) An analysis of the global performance of GM crops (1996–2006). Friends of the earth ‘Who benefits from GM crops?’ issue 111, Jan.
Lotter, D. (2003) Beyond GMO… the REAL answer to healthy, disease resistant crops. new Farm magazine, published online
Lotter, D.W., KoCH, r. and LIeBHArDt, W. (2003) the performance of organic and conventional cropping systems in an extreme climate year, American Journal of Alternative Agriculture, 21(4), pp. 1–9.
MArSHALL, A. (2007) GM soybeans and health safety: a controversy reexamined, Nature Biotechnology, 25, pp. 981–987.
MArtIn, B. (1999) Suppression of dissent in science, Research in Social Problems and Public Policy, 7, pp. 105–135.
MAttHeWS, J. (2003a) Biotech’s hall of mirrors: a very dirty game, GeneWatch, 16(1).
MAttHeWS, J. (2003b) From Berkeley to Johannesburg, from India to Zambia, biotech’s deceivers are playing a very dirty game, GeneWatch, 16(1).
MeLLon, M. and rISSLer, J. (2003) environmental effects of genetically modified food crops, recent experiences, Paper presented at conference ‘Genetically Modified Foods – the American experience’, royal Veterinary and Agricultural University, Copenhagen, Denmark, 12–13 June, published online
Menon, S. (2007) ear to the ground, Business Standard, 22 July.
MetLAY, G. (2006) reconsidering renormalization: stability and change in 20th-century views on university patents, Social Studies of Science, 36(4), pp. 565–597.
MonBIot, G. (2002a) the fake persuaders: corporations are inventing people to rubbish their opponents on the internet, The Guardian, 14 May.
MonBIot, G. (2002b) Corporate phantoms, The Guardian, 29 May.
nAtIonAL ACADeMY oF SCIenCeS (2004) Safety of Genetically Engineered Foods: Approaches to Assessing Unintended
Health Effects. Washington, DC: national Academies Press.
NATURE BIOTECHNOLOGY (2007) opinion and Comment section, Nature Biotechnology, 25(12), pp. 1329–1492.
neLKIn, D. (1984) Science as Intellectual Property: Who Controls research? new York: MacMillan.
oDHIAMBo, A. (2007) Annan rules out use of GMos in the war on hunger in Africa, Business Daily, 17 July.
oJAnJI, W. (2007) Drought-resistant GM crops sought, East African Standard, 9 Sept.
PeW InItIAtIVe on FooD AnD BIoteCHnoLoGY (2004) Issues in the Regulation of Genetically Engineered Plants and Animals. report, April, published online
PeW InItIAtIVe on FooD AnD BIoteCHnoLoGY (2007) Emerging Challenges for Biotech Specialty Crops. Workshop report, 18–19 January, published online
PHILIPKoSKI, K. (2002) A dust-up over GMo crops, Wired News, 12 June, publised online
PoLLACt, A. (2009) Crop scientists say biotechnology seed companies are thwarting research, The New York Times, 20 February.
PoLLAn, M. (2001) the great yellow hype, The New York Times, 4 Mar.
PoWeLL, D.A., BLAIne, K., MorrIS, S., and WILSon, J. (2003) Agronomic and consumer considerations for Bt and conventional sweet corn, British Food Journal, 105(10), pp. 700–713.
PRESS (2007) Scientist says Ge crops don’t live up to promise, The Press, 16 April.
PreSS, e. and WASHBUrn, J. (2000) the kept university, Atlantic Monthly, 285(3), pp. 39–54.
PrettY, J.n., noBLe, A.D., BoSSIo, D., DIxon, J., HIne, r.e., PennInG De VrIeS, F.W.t. and MorISon, J.I.L. (2006) resource-conserving agriculture increases yields in developing countries, Environmental Science and Technology, 40(4), pp. 1114–1119.
PrYMe, I.F. and LeMBCKe, r. (2003) In vivo studies on possible health consequences of genetically modified food and feed: with particular regard to ingredients consisting of genetically modified plant materials, Nutrition and Health, 17, pp. 1–8.
QUISt, D. and CHAPeLA, I. (2001) transgenic DnA introgressed into traditional maize landraces in oaxaca, Mexico, Nature, 414(6863), pp. 541–543.
rAFFenSBerGer, C. and tICKner, J. (1999) Protecting Public Health and the Environment: Implementing the Precautionary
Principle. Washington, DC: Island Press.
roSS, J. (2004) the sad saga of Ignacio Chapela, Anderson Valley Advertiser, 18 Feb.
SALLAH, A. (2002) Mexican Maize Madness. ABC Science, 7 Apr., published online
SASAKI, t. (2006) Plant breeding: rice in deep water, Nature, 442(7103), pp. 635–636.
SCHUSter, J.A. (1995) The Scientific Revolution: An Introduction to the History and Philosophy of Science. Wollongong:
University of Wollongong.
SerALInI, G. e., CeLLIer, D. and De VenDoMoIS, J.S. (2007) new analysis of a rat feeding study with a genetically modified maize reveals signs of hepatorenal toxicity, Archives of Environmental Contamination and Toxicology, 52(4), pp. 596–602.
SHArMA, A.B. (2007) Conventional seeds, hybrids to ensure food security, Financial Express, 22 July.
SIGeLMAn, L. andWHICKer, M.L. (1987) Some implications of bias in peer review: a simulation-based analysis, Social Science Quarterly, 68(3), pp. 494–509.
SLAUGHter, S. and rHoADeS, G. (2004) Academic Capitalism and the New Economy : Markets, State, and Higher Education. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press.
SLAUGHter, S. and LeSLIe, L.L. (1997) Academic Capitalism: Politics, Policies, and the Entrepreneurial University. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press.
SMItH, J. (2003) Seeds of Deception. Fairfield, IA: Yes Books.
SMItH-Doerr, L. (2005) Institutionalizing the network form: how life scientists legitimatework in the biotechnology industry, Sociological Forum, 20(2), pp. 271–299.
StUArt, t.e., and DInG, W. (2006) When do scientists become entrepreneurs? the social structural antecedents of commercial activity in the academic life sciences, American Journal of Sociology, 112(1), pp. 97–144.
UnIon oF ConCerneD SCIentIStS (2006) Voices of Scientists at the FDA: Protecting Public Health Depends on Independent Science. Union of Concerned Scientists report, published online
UPHoFF, n. (2007) Agroecological alternatives: capitalising on existing genetic potentials, Journal of Development Studies, 43(1), pp. 218–236.
VerGAno, D. (2007) Science vs. politics gets down and dirty, USA Today, 5 July.
WeLSH, r. and GLennA, L. (2007) Considering the role of the university in conducting research on agribiotechnologies,
Social Studies of Science, 36(6), pp. 929–942.
WHeeLer, S.A. (2008) the barriers to further adoption of organic farming and genetic engineering in Australia: views of agricultural professionals and their information sources, Renewable Agriculture and Food Systems, 23(2), pp. 161–170.
WInGenBACH, G.J. and rUtHerForD t.A. (2005) trust, bias, and fairness of information sources for biotechnology issues, AgBioForum, 8(4), pp. 213–220.
WoLoSHIn, S. and SCHWArtZ, L.M. (2002) Press releases: translating research into news, JAMA, 287, pp.2856–2858.
ZoLLA, L., rInALDUCCI, S., AntonIoLI, P. and rIGHettI, P.G. (2008) Proteomics as a complementary tool for identifying unintended side effects occurring in transgenic maize seeds as a result of genetic modifications, Journal of Proteome Research, 7(5), pp. 1850–1861.