Agricultural biotechnology and regulatory innovation in India

Science and Public Policy

Volumn 38, Issue 4, 2011, Pages 319-331

  Freeman, Julia ^a   Satterfield, Terre ^a   Kandlikar, Milind ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA   (Canada)

^b UBC   (Canada)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

AGRICULTURAL TECHNOLOGY; BIOTECHNOLOGY; CIVIL SOCIETY; COMPARATIVE STUDY; ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT; HEALTH IMPACT; INNOVATION; LOCAL PARTICIPATION; OECD; REGULATORY FRAMEWORK;

EUROPE; INDIA; UNITED STATES;

GOSSYPIUM HIRSUTUM;

EID: 79958852756     PISSN: 03023427     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.3152/030234211X12924093660318     Document Type: Article

References (65)

1. Aerni, P 2002. Stakeholder attitudes toward the risks and benefits of agricultural biotechnology in developing countries: a comparison between Mexico and the Philippines. Risk Analysis, 22(6), 1123-1137.
2. Bauer, Martin W 2005. Public perceptions and mass media in the biotechnology controversy. International Journal of Public Opinion Research, 17(1), 5-22.
3. Bernauer, T 2003. Genes, Trade, and Regulation: the Seeds of Conflict in Food Biotechnology. New Jersey: Princeton University Press.
4. Brahmi, Pratibha, Sanjeev Saxena and BS Dhillon 2004. The protection of plant varieties and farmers rights' Act of India. Current Science, 86(3), 392-398.
5. Carr, S and L Levidow 2000. Exploring the links between science, risk, uncertainty, and ethics in regulatory controversies about genetically modified crops, Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics, 12(1), 29-39.
6. Cassels, Jamie 1989. Judicial activism and public interest litigation in India: attempting the impossible? American Journal of Comparative Law, 37(3), 495-519.
7. Clapp, J 2006. Unplanned exposure to genetically modified organisms: divergent responses in the global south. Journal of Environment and Development, 15(1), 3-21.
8. Curtis, Kynda R, Jill J McCluskey and Thomas I Wahl 2004. Consumer acceptance of genetically modified food products in the developing world. AgBioForum, 7(1&2), 70-75.
9. Damodaran, A 2005. Re-engineering biosafety regulations in India: towards a critique of policy, law and prescriptions. Law, Environment and Development Journal, 1, 1-20.
10. DBT, Department of Biotechnology 2008. Draft Establishment Plan for Setting up of National Biotechnology Regulatory (NBRA) and Draft National Biotechnology Regulatory Bill (2008) Available at http://dbtindia.nic.in/uniquepage.asp?id_pk=668, last accessed 12 January 2010.
11. DBT, MST, Department of Biotechnology, Ministry of Science and Technology 2008. Draft Establishment Plan for the National Biotechnology Regulatory Authority. Report. 28 May. Available at dbtindia.nic.in/Draft%20establishment%20plan%20for%20NBRA_28may2008.pdf, last accessed 12 January 2010.
12. Dembowski, Hans 2001. Taking the State to Court: Public Interest Litigation and the Public Sphere. Asia House. Available at www.asienhaus.de/public/archiv/taking_the_state_to_court.pdf, last accessed 1 July 2010.
13. Falkner, Robert ed. 2007. The international politics of genetically modified food: diplomacy, trade and law. Hampshire: Palgrave Macmillan.
14. Fischer, A 2007. Which road to social revolution? Global inequalities and the dialectics of constitutional reform in India. Hei1delberg Papers in South Asian and Comparative Politics, 34, 1-28.
15. Fitting, Elizabeth 2006. Importing corn, exporting labor: the neoliberal corn regime, GMOs, and the erosion of Mexican biodiversity. Agriculture and Human Values, 23(1), 15-26.
16. Frewer, Lynn J, Susan Miles and Roy Marsh 2002. The media and genetically modified foods: evidence in support of social amplification of risk. Risk Analysis, 22(4), 701-711.
17. Fukuda-Parr, Sakiko ed. 2007. The Gene Revolution: GM Crops and Unequal Development. London: Earthscan/James & James.
18. Glover, D 2003. GMOs and the Politics of International Trade, Democratising Biotechnology: Genetically Modified Crops in Developing Countries. Briefing 5, IDS, Brighton, UK.
19. Gupta, Aarti 2000. Governing Biosafety in India: the Relevance of the Cartagena Protocol. Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs (BCSIA) Discussion Paper 2000-24, Environment and Natural Resources Program, Kennedy School of Government, Harvard University.
20. Gupta, A and R Falkner 2006. The influence of the Cartagena Protocol on biosafety: comparing Mexico, China and South Africa. Global Environmental Politics, 6(4), 23-55.
21. Herdt, Robert W 2006. Biotechnology in agriculture. Annual Review of Environment and Resources, 31, 265-295.
22. Herring, Ronald J 2005. Miracle seeds, suicide seeds and the poor: GMOs, NGOs, farmers, and the state. Social Movements in India: Poverty, Power, and Politics, eds Raka Ray and Mary Fainsod Katzenstein, pp. 203-232. Lanham, MD, USA: Rowman & Littlefield.
23. Herring, Ronald J 2007. Stealth seeds: bioproperty, biosafety, biopolitics. Journal of Development Studies, 43(1), 130-157.
24. Herring, Ronald J 2009. Persistent narratives: why is the 'failure of Bt cotton in India' story still with us. AgBioForum, 12(1), 14-22.
25. Hindu online newspaper 2008. PIL: prohibit the release of harmful seed. 13 August. Available at http://www.hindu.com/2008/08/13/stories/2008081351651400.htm, last accessed 18 August 2009.
26. Jasanoff, Sheila 1995. Product, process, or programme: three cultures and the regulation of biotechnology. In Resistance to New Technology, ed. M W Bauer, pp. 311-330. Cambridge University Press.
27. Jasanoff, Sheila 2005. Designs on Nature: Science and Democracy in Europe and the United States. New Jersey: Princeton University Press.
28. Jayaraman, KS 2002. Illegal Bt cotton in India haunts regulators. Nature Biotechnology, 19, 1090.
29. Kleinman, Daniel Lee; Abby J Kinchy and Robyn Autry 2009. Local variation or global convergence in agricultural biotechnology policy? A comparative analysis. Science and Public Policy, 36(5), June, 361-371.
30. Marris, Claire, Brian Wynne, Peter Simmons and Sue Weldon 2001. Public Perceptions of Agricultural Biotechnologies in Europe: Final Report of the PABE Research Project. Commission of European Communities.
31. Mehta, Pratap Bhanu 2006. Of Law and Politicians. Seminar. 557. Available http://www.india-seminar.com/2006/557/557%20pratap%20bhanu%20mehta.htm, last accessed 1 July 2010.
32. Mitta, Manoj 2008. Plan for GM regulatory authority may spark turf war. Times of India, 19 June. Available at http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/articleshow/msid-3143579,prtpage-1.cms, last accessed 29 December 2009.
33. MoA, Ministry of Agriculture 2004. Report of the Task Force on Application of Agricultural Biotechnology. Available at http://agricoop.nic.in/TaskForce/tf.htm, last accessed 23 February 2010.
34. Murugkar, M, B Ramaswami and M Shelar 2007. Competition and monopoly in Indian cotton seed market. Economic and Political Weekly, 42(37), 3781.
35. Nap, Jan-Peter, Peter L J Metz, Marga Escaler and Anthony J Conner 2003. The release of genetically modified crops into the environment: Part I. Overview of current status and regulations. Plant Journal, 33(1), 1-18.
36. Newell, Peter 2003. Biotech firms, biotech politics: negotiating GMOs in India. Institute of Development Studies, IDS Working Paper, no. 201, 1-33.
37. Newell, Peter 2008. Lost in translation? Domesticating global policy on genetically modified organisms: comparing India and China. Global Society, 22(1), 115-136.
38. OECD, Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development 1986. Recombinant DNA safety considerations: safety considerations for industrial, agricultural and environmental applications of organisms derived by recombinant DNA techniques. Report. Available at http://www.oecd.org/LongAbstract/0,3425,en_2649_34537_40986856_1_1_1_1,00.html, last accessed 1 February 2009.
39. Osgood, Diane 2001. Dig it up: global civil society's responses to plant biotechnology. In Global Civil Society 2001, eds Helmut Anheier, Marlies Glasius, and Mary Kaldor, pp. 79-107. London: Centre for the Study of Global Governance, London School of Economics.
40. Paarlberg, Robert 2008. Starved for Science: How Biotechnology is Being Kept Out of Africa, Cambridge, MA and London, England: Harvard University Press.
41. Pental, Deepak 2003. Transgenics for productive and sustainable agriculture: Some consideration for the development of a policy framework. Current Science, 84(3), 413-424.
42. Prakash, A and K Kollman 2003. Biopolitics in the US and the EU: a race to the bottom or convergence to the top. International Studies Quarterly, 47(4), 609-633.
43. Pray, CE, P Bengali and B Ramaswami 2005. The cost of biosafety regulations: the Indian experience. Quarterly Journal of International Agriculture, 44(3), 267-290.
44. Rajamani, L 2007. Public interest environmental litigation in India: exploring issues of access, participation, equity, effectiveness and sustainability. Journal of Environmental Law, 19(3), 293-321.
45. Ramaswami, Bharat and Carl E Pray 2007. India: confronting the challenge - the potential of genetically modified crops for the poor. In The Gene Revolution: GM Crops and Unequal Development, ed. Sakiko Fukuda-Parr, pp. 156-174. London: Earthscan.
46. Ramesh, J 2010. Decision on Commercialization of Bt Brinjal. Ministry of Environment and Forests. Available at http://moef.nic.in/downloads/publicinformation/minister_REPORT.pdf, last accessed 1 July 2010.
47. RCGM, Review Committee on Genetic Manipulation 2010. Main functions. Available at http://dbtbiosafety.nic.in/committee/rcgm.htm, last accessed 23 February 2010.
48. Rosendal, Kristin 2005. Governing GMOs in the EU: a deviant case of environmental policy-making? Global Environmental Politics, 5(1), 82-104.
49. Sahai, Suman 2005. The National Biotechnology Development Strategy: present version unacceptable. Available at http://www.genecampaign.org/Publication/Article/biotechnology/Biotech%20policy%20-epw-27.11.05.pdf, last accessed 16 March 2010.
50. Scoones, Ian 2006. Science, Agriculture and the Politics of Policy: the Case of Biotechnology. New Delhi: Orient Longman.
51. Scoones, Ian 2007. The contested politics of technology: biotech in Bangalore. Science and Public Policy, 34(4), May, 261-271.
52. Scoones, Ian 2008. Mobilizing against GM crops in India, South Africa and Brazil. Journal of Agrarian Change, 8(23), 315-344.
53. Sharma, Ashok B 2008. Supreme Court vacates ban order on GM crops trials. Financial Express, 18 February. Available at http://www.financialexpress.com/news/Supreme-Courtvacates-ban-order-on-GM-crops-trials/272520/, last accessed 20 January 2010.
54. Shiva, Vandana 2000. Stolen Harvest: This Highjacking of the Global Food Supply. Cambridge, MA: South End Press.
55. Shiva, Vandana 2008. Dismantling democracy, science and the public interest to put GMOs on fast track: the proposed National Biotechnology Regulatory Authority (NBRA) and National Biotechnology Regulatory Bill, 2008. Counter Currents, 14 July. Available at http://www.countercurrents.org/shiva140708.htm, last accessed 29 December 2008.
56. Sinha, Amitabh and DK Singh 2010. Biotech regulator: Cabinet clears Bill. India Express.com article. Available at http://www.indianexpress.com/news/biotech-regulator-cabinet-clearsbill/661138/, last accessed 15 September 2010.
57. Srivastava, Suchi 2006. Kisan Jam: an MNC harvest in the India fields. Outlook India, 9 October. Available at http://www.outlookindia.com/article.aspx?232756, last accessed 21 May 2010.
58. Stirling, Andy 2008. 'Opening up' and 'closing down': power, participation and pluralism in the social appraisal of technology. Science, Technology and Human Values, 33, 262-295.
59. Stone, GD 2002. Both sides now: fallacies in the geneticmodification wars, implications for developing countries, and anthropological perspectives. Current Anthropology, 43(4), 611-619.
60. Swaminathan, MS Chairman 2004. Report of the Task Force on Application of Agricultural Biotechnology. Ministry of Agriculture. Government of India.
61. Thampi, Praveen 2009. A credible biotech regulatory is required. Economic Times, 24 November. Available at http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/Opinion/Policy/A-crediblebiotech-regulatory-regime-isrequired/articleshow/5262714.cms?curpg=3, last accessed 30 September 2010.
62. Thirtle, Colin, Lindie Beyers, Yousouf Ismael and Jenifer Piesse 2003. Can GM-technologies help the poor? The impact of Bt cotton in Makhathini Flats, KwaZulu-Natal. World Development, 31(4), 717-732.
63. Tiberghien, Yves 2007. Europe: turning against agricultural biotechnology in the late 1990s. In The Gene Revolution: GM Crops and Unequal Development, ed. S. Fukuda-Parr, pp. 51-68. London: Earthscan.
64. Vogel, David 2003. The hare and the tortoise revisited: the new politics of consumer and environmental regulation in Europe. British Journal of Political Science, 33(4), 557-580.
65. Young, AR 2003. Political transfer and 'trading up'? World Politics, 55, 457-484.