State science, risk and agricultural biotechnology: Bt cotton to Bt Brinjal in India

Journal of Peasant Studies

Volumn 42, Issue 1, 2015, Pages 159-186

  Herring, Ronald J ^a  

^a Cornell University ^*  (United States)

Author keywords

agriculture; Bangladesh; bio safety; biotechnology; Bt brinjal; Bt cotton; Bt eggplant (aubergine); food safety; GMO; India; politics of science; regulation; risk

Indexed keywords

AGRICULTURAL TECHNOLOGY; BIOTECHNOLOGY; COTTON; FOOD SAFETY; GENETICALLY MODIFIED ORGANISM; RISK ASSESSMENT; TECHNOLOGY ADOPTION; VEGETABLE;

BANGLADESH; INDIA;

GOSSYPIUM HIRSUTUM; SOLANUM MELONGENA;

EID: 84923437502     PISSN: 03066150     EISSN: 17439361     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/03066150.2014.951835     Document Type: Article

References (109)

1. AgBioWorld. 2010. Academies maintain Bt brinjal is safe. December 29. Available from: http://www.agbioworld.org/newsletter_wm/index.php?caseid=archive&newsid=3035
2. Agin, D. 2006. Junk science: An overdue assessment of government, industry and faith groups that twist science for their own gain. New York: St Martin's Press.
3. Bambawale, O.M., A. Singh, O.P. Sharma, B.B. Bhosle, R.C. Lavekar, A. Dhandhapani, V. Kanwar, R.K. Tanwar, K.S. Rathod, N.R. Patange, and V.M. Pawar. 2004. Performance of Bt cotton (MECH-162) under integrated pest management in farmers’ participatory field trial in Nanded district, Central India. Current Science 86, no. 12: 1628–33.
4. Batista, R., N. Saibo, T. Lourenço, and M.M. Oliveira. 2008. Microarray analyses reveal that plant mutagenesis may induce more transcriptomic changes than transgene insertion. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 105, no. 9: 3640–5. doi: 10.1073/pnas.0707881105
5. Bennett, R., U. Kambhampati, S. Morse, and Y. Ismael. 2006. Farm-level economic performance of genetically modified cotton in Maharashtra, India. Review of Agricultural Economics 28, no. 1: 59–71. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-9353.2006.00273.x
6. Bharathan, G. 2000. Bt-cotton in India: Anatomy of a controversy. Current Science 79, no. 8: 1067–75.
7. Bonny, S. 2003. Why are most europeans opposed to GMOs? Factors explaining rejection in France and Europe. Electronic Journal of Biotechnology 6, no. 1: 50–71. doi: 10.2225/vol6-issue1-fulltext-4
8. Bownas, R. 2008. Framing farmers: The case of GM crops and transnational activist networks in India. Paper presented at the American political science association annual meeting, August 29, Boston, MA.
9. Business Standard. 2014. ‘GM field trials: Regulator proposes but most states decline’. September 26. Available at http://www.business-standard.com/article/current-affairs/gm-field-trials-regulator-proposes-but-most-states-decline-114032500905_1.html
10. Choudhary, B., and K. Gaur. 2008. The development and regulation of Bt brinjal in India (Eggplant/Aubergine). ISAAA Brief No. 38. Ithaca, NY: ISAAA.
11. Cohen, J.I. 2005. Poor nations turn to publicly developed GM crops. Nature Biotechnology 23, no. 1: 27–33. doi: 10.1038/nbt0105-27
12. Cooley, A., and J. Ron. 2002. The NGO scramble: Organizational insecurity and the political economy of transnational action. International Security 27, no. 1: 5–39. doi: 10.1162/016228802320231217
13. Current Science. 2011. In Conversation – Jairam Ramesh. V. 100, N0. 11, p 1610. June 10. http://www.ias.ac.in/currsci/10jun2011/1610.pdf
14. Davidson, S.N. 2008. Forbidden fruit: Transgenic papaya in Thailand. Plant Physiology 147: 487–93. doi: 10.1104/pp.108.116913
15. DeFrancesco, L. 2013. How safe does transgenic food need to be?. Nature Biotechnology 31, no. 9: 794–802. doi: 10.1038/nbt.2686
16. Dhandapani, N., U.R. Shelkar, and M. Murugan. 2003. Bio-intensive pest management in major vegetable crops: An Indian perspective. Journal of Food, Agriculture & Environment 1, no. 2: 330–9.
17. Douglas, M., and A.B. Wildavsky. 1982. Risk and culture: An essay on the selection of technical and environmental dangers. Berkeley: University of California Press.
18. European Food Safety Authority. 2010. Adopted part of the minutes of the 55th plenary Meeting of the Scientific Panel on Genetically Modified Organisms held on 27–28 January 2010 to be published at http://www.efsa.europa.eu/en/events/event/gmo100127.htm Brussels: EFSA.
19. European Union (EU) Research Directorate. 2010. A decade of EU-Funded GMO research (2001–2010). EUR 24473 EN, Brussels.
20. Financial Express (India). 2010. On the side of science. Editorial, February 16.
21. Financial Express. 2010. The Bt. brinjal goes politicking. Seminar # 614. New Delhi 2010. The Financial Express. India. 2010. Editorial – On the Side of Science. Feb 16. http://www.financialexpress.com
22. Gandhi, V.P., and N.V. Namboodiri. (2006). The Adoption of Bt Cotton in India: Preliminary Results from a Study, Working Paper No. 2006-09-04, Ahmedabad: Indian Institute of Management.
23. Giddens, A. 1999. Risk and responsibility. Modern Law Review, 62: 1–10. doi: 10.1111/1468-2230.00188
24. GM Watch. 2010. 13 Indian states say NO to Bt brinjal. 8 February. Available from: http://www.gmwatch.org/latest-listing/1-news-items/11911-13-indian-states-say-no-to-bt-brinjal [accessed 15 February 2010].
25. Gruère, P. Guillaume, P. Mehta-Bhatt, and D. Sengupta. 2008. Bt cotton and farmer suicides in India. Reviewing the evidence. Discussion Paper No. 808. Washington, DC: International Food Policy Research Institute.
26. Gruère, G.P., and D. Sengupta. 2011. Bt cotton and farmer suicides in India: An evidence-based assessment. Journal of Development Studies 47, no. 2: 316–37. doi: 10.1080/00220388.2010.492863
27. Gupta, A. 2011. An evolving science-society contract in India: The search for legitimacy in anticipatory risk governance. Food Policy 36: 736–41. doi: 10.1016/j.foodpol.2011.07.011
28. Gupta, A.K., and V. Chandak. 2005. Agricultural biotechnology in India: Ethics, business and politics. International Journal of Biotechnology 7, no. 1–3: 212–27. doi: 10.1504/IJBT.2005.006455
29. Haq, Z. 2010. Panel's Disclaimer to Ramesh. Hindustan Times, February 15.
30. Herring, R.J. 2006. Why did ‘operation cremate Monsanto’ fail? Science and Class in India's Great Terminator-Technology Hoax. Critical Asian Studies 38, no. 4: 467–93. doi: 10.1080/14672710601073010
31. Herring, R.J. 2007a. The genomics revolution and development studies: Science, poverty and politics. Journal of Development Studies 43, no. 1: 1–30. doi: 10.1080/00220380601055502
32. Herring, R.J. 2007b. Stealth seeds: Bioproperty, biosafety, biopolitics. Journal of Development Studies 43, no. 1: 130–57. doi: 10.1080/00220380601055601
33. Herring, R.J. 2008. Opposition to transgenic technologies: Ideology, interests, and collective action frames. Nature Reviews Genetics 9: 458–63. doi: 10.1038/nrg2338
34. Herring, R.J. 2009. Global rifts over biotechnology: What does India's experience with Bt cotton tell us? V.T. Krishnamachari memorial lecture. New Delhi: Institute for Economic Growth, Delhi University.
35. Herring, R.J. 2010. Framing the GMO: Epistemic brokers, authoritative knowledge and diffusion of opposition to biotechnology. In R. Kolins Givan, K.M. Roberts and S.A. Soule, eds., The diffusion of social movements. NY: Cambridge University Press, pp. 78–98.
36. Herring, R.J. 2013. Re-constructing facts in Bt cotton. Economic and Political Weekly, 48(18), 33.
37. Herring, R.J., and M. Kandlikar. 2009. Illicit seeds: Intellectual Property and the underground proliferation of agricultural biotechnologies. In S. Haunss and K.C. Shadlen, eds., The politics of intellectual property: Contestation over the ownership, use, and control of knowledge and information Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar, pp. 56–79.
38. Herring, R.J., and N. Chandrasekhara Rao. 2012. On the ‘failure of Bt cotton’: Analysing a decade of experience. Economic and Political Weekly 47, no. 18: 45–54.
39. Hindustan Times. 2010a. Scientists slam key study behind Bt brinjal ban. Zia Haq, New Delhi, February 12.
40. Hindustan Times. 2010b. ‘I took a decision- I may be wrong’. New Delhi, February 14. Available at http://www.hindustantimes.com/india-news/newdelhi/i-took-a-decision-i-may-be-wrong/article1-508644.aspx
41. Hindustan Times. 2012. Jairam differs with PM, says no NGO forced Bt Brinjal ban. HT Correspondents, Thiruvananthapuram/New Delhi, February 25.
42. Ho, M-W. 2000. Genetic engineering: Dream or nightmare? Turning the tide on the brave new world of bad science and big business. New York, NY: Continuum.
43. Indian Horticulture Database. 2006. Government of India. http://nhb.gov.in/area-pro/Indian%20Horticulture%202013.pdf
44. James, C. Annual. Global status of commercialized biotech/GM crops. Ithaca, NY: International Service for the Acquisition of Agri-Biotech Applications.
45. Jasanoff, S. 2005. Designs on nature. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
46. Jayaraman, K.S. 2001. Illegal Bt cotton in India haunts regulators. Nature Biotechnology 19, no. 12: 1090–1092. doi: 10.1038/nbt1201-1090
47. Jayaraman, K. 2010. Bt brinjal splits indian cabinet. Nature Biotechnology 28: 296. doi: 10.1038/nbt0410-296
48. Kanter, J. 2010. Europe's New Approach to Biotech Food. The New York Times, 7 July.
49. Kathage, J., and M. Qaim. 2012. Economic impacts and impact dynamics of Bt (Bacillus Thuringiensis) cotton in India. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 109, no. 29: 11652–6. doi: 10.1073/pnas.1203647109
50. Knight, Frank H. 1921. Risk, Uncertainty, and Profit. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.
51. Kolady, D.E., and W. Lesser. 2008. Potential welfare benefits from the public-private partnerships: A case of genetically engineered eggplant in India. Journal of Food, Agriculture & Environment 6, no. 3&4: 333–340.
52. Kolady, D.E., and W. Lesser. 2011. Genetically-engineered crops and their effects on varietal diversity: a case of Bt eggplant in India. Agriculture and Human Values. doi 10.1007/s10460-011-9320-3May
53. Krishna, V.V., and M. Qaim. 2007. Estimating the adoption of Bt eggplant in India: Who Benefits from public–private partnership?. Food Policy 32: 523–43. doi: 10.1016/j.foodpol.2006.11.002
54. Kumar, S., A. Misra, A. Kumar Verma, R. Roy, A. Tripathi, K.M. Ansari, M. Das, and P.D. Dwivedi. 2011. Bt brinjal in India: A long way to go. GM Crops 2, no. 2: 92–8. doi: 10.4161/gmcr.2.2.16335
55. Latour, B. 2003. Why has critique run out of steam? From matters of fact to matters of concern. Critical Inquiry 30, no. 2: 225–248. doi: 10.1086/421123
56. Laxman, S. 2012. US NGOs Behind Kudankulam Stir: PM. The Times of India. New Delhi Print Edition, February 24.
57. Mathur, A., N.P. Singh, and S. Singh. 2012. Management of Brinjal Shoot and Fruit Borer: Dilemma of Adopting Bt Brinjal over Integrated Pest Management Technology. 2012 International Conference on Clean and Green Energy IPCBEE vol.27. Singapore: IACSIT Press.
58. Mehta, S., ed. 2005. Bt cotton: A painful episode. Vadodara, Gujarat: Gujarat Kapas Utpadak Hitrakshak Sangh.
59. Ministry of Environment and Forests. 2010. Decision on commercialisation of Bt-brinjal MOS(IjC)E&F February 9th, 2010. New Delhi: Ministry of Environment and Forests.
60. Ministry of Environment and Forests, Genetic Engineering Approval Committee. 2009. Report of the Expert Committee (EC-II) on Bt Brinjal Event EE-1 Developed by: M/s Maharashtra Hybrid Seeds Company Ltd. (MAHYCO), Mumbai; University of Agricultural Sciences (UAS), Dharwad; and Tamil Nadu Agricultural University (TNAU), Coimbatore. October 8. New Delhi: Government of India.
61. Ministry of Science and Technology, Department of Biotechnology. 2008. Revised Guidelines for Research in Transgenic Plants and Guidelines for Toxicity and Allergenicity Evaluation of Transgenic Seeds, Plants and Plant Parts. New Delhi: Government of India.
62. Mitta, M. 2010. Challenges posed by Bt Brinjal. Times of India Crest, Feb 6.
63. Naik, G., M. Qaim, A. Subramanian, and D. Zilberman. 2005. Bt Cotton Controversy: Some Paradoxes Explained. Economic and Political Weekly, April 9: 1514–7.
64. Narayanamoorthy, A., and S.S. Kalamkar. 2006. Is Bt cotton cultivation economically viable for Indian farmers? An empirical analysis. Economic and Political Weekly, June 30, 2716–24.
65. Narendra. 2010. VJAS urged Maharashtra CM to oppose Bt Brinjal. 7 February. Available from: http://www.mynews.in/News/VJAS_urged_Maharashtra_CM_to_oppose_Bt_Brinjal_N3493.html#
66. Nicolia, A., A. Manzo, F. Veronesi, and D. Rosellini. 2013. An overview of the last 10 years of GE crop safety research. Critical Reviews in Biotechnology, Early Online: 1–12. doi: 10.3109/07388551.2013.823595
67. Omvedt, G. 2005. Farmers’ movements and the debate on poverty and economic reforms in India. In Social movements in India: Poverty, power and politics, eds. Raka Ray and Mary Katzenstein, 179–203. Delhi: Oxford University Press.
68. Oreskes, N., and E. Conway. 2010. Merchants of Doubt: How a Handful of Scientists Obscured the Truth on Issues from Tobacco Smoke to Global Warming. New York: Bloomsbury.
69. Paarlberg, R.L. 2001. The politics of precaution: Genetically modified crops in developing countries. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press.
70. Pinstrup-Andersen, P., and E. Schioler. 2000. Seeds of contention: World hunger and the global controversy over GM crops. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.
71. Ramaswami, B., C. Pray, and N. Lalitha. 2011. The spread of illegal transgenic cotton varieties in India: Biosafety regulation, monopoly and enforcement. World Development. pp. 1–12.
72. Rao, C.K. 2007a. Causes of death of cattle and sheep in the Telengana region of Andhra Pradesh in India. Bangalore: Foundation for Biotechnology Awareness and Education. Available at http://www.plantbiotechnology.org.in/issues.html [Accessed May 30, 2009].
73. Rao, C.K. 2007b. Why do cattle die eating Bt cotton plants only in the Telengana region of Andhra Pradesh in India?. Bangalore: Foundation for Biotechnology Awareness and Education. Available at: http://www.plantbiotechnology.org.in/issues.html (accessed May 30, 2009).
74. Rao, C.K. 2010. Moratorium on Bt brinjal. Bangalore: Foundation for Biotechnology Awareness and Education.
75. Rao, C.K. 2013. Charges of ‘Biopiracy and Violation of Provisions of the Indian Biodiversity Act Against the Developers of Bt Brinjal. Available from: http://www.plantbiotechnology.org.in/. Bangalore: Foundation for BiotechnologyAwareness and Education.
76. Rao, N.C. 2013. Bt cotton yields and performance: Data and methodological issues. Economic and Political Weekly, xlviii, no. 33.
77. Rao, N.C., and M. Dev. 2010. Biotechnology in Indian agriculture: Potential, performance and concerns. New Delhi: Academic Foundation.
78. Review of Agrarian Studies. 2011. Transgenic Varieties and India's Agriculture: Questions for Professor M. S. Swaminathan, 1, no. 1. Available from: http://www.ras.org.in/index.php?Article=8725fb777f25776ffa9076e44fcfd776
79. Roy, D. 2006. Adoption Paradox of Bt Cotton in Gujarat, India. Ph.D. dissertation in the Department of Development Sociology, Cornell University. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University.
80. Roy, D., R.J. Herring, and C.C. Geisler. 2007. Naturalising transgenics: Official seeds, loose seeds and risk in the decision matrix of Gujarati cotton farmers. Journal of Development Studies 43, no. 1: 158–76. doi: 10.1080/00220380601055635
81. Sato, K. 2007. Meanings of genetically modified food and policy change and persistence: The cases of France, Japan and the United States. PhD Dissertation. Princeton University. Princeton, NJ.
82. Sahai, S. 2002. Bt cotton: confusion prevails. Economic and Political Weekly, 25 May.
83. Sahai, S. 2003. MAHYCO-Monsanto Bt cotton is a failure. Current Science 85, no. 4: 426–427.
84. Samuels, J. 2013. Bt brinjal: a risk assessment worth taking?. Current Science 104, no. 5, March: 571–572.
85. Schurman, R. 2004. Fighting ‘Frankenfoods’: Industry Opportunity Structures and the Efficacy of the Anti-Biotech Movement in Western Europe. Social Problems 51, no. 2: 243–68. doi: 10.1525/sp.2004.51.2.243
86. Schurman, R., and W. Munro. 2006. Ideas, thinkers and social networks: The process of grievance construction in the anti-genetic engineering movement. Theory and Society 35: 1–38. doi: 10.1007/s11186-006-6779-9
87. Schurman, R., and W. Munro. 2010. Fighting for the future of food: Activists versus agribusiness in the struggle over biotechnology. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
88. Scoones, I. 2006. Science, agriculture and the politics of policy. Hyderabad: Orient Longman.
89. Scoones, I. 2009. The politics of global assessments: the case of the international assessment of agricultural knowledge, science and technology for development (IAASTD). Journal of Peasant Studies 36, no. 3: 547–57. doi: 10.1080/03066150903155008
90. Scott, J. 1985. Weapons of the weak: Everyday forms of peasant resistance. New Haven: Yale University Press.
91. Sell, S.K., and A. Prakash. 2004. Using ideas strategically: The contest between business and NGO networks in intellectual property rights. International Studies Quarterly 48: 143–75. doi: 10.1111/j.0020-8833.2004.00295.x
92. Shah, E. 2005. Local and global elites join hands: Development and diffusion of Bt cotton technology in Gujarat. Economic and Political Weekly, October 2.
93. Shah, E. 2011. ‘Science’ in the risk politics of Bt Brinjal. Economic and Political Weekly xlvi, no 31.
94. Shaik, S. 2001. Farmers decide to defend their Bt gene cotton crops. The Times of India, Oct 31.
95. Shiva, V. 2006. Resources, rights and regulatory reform. Context 3, no. 1: 85–91.
96. Shiva, V., and A.H. Jafri. 2004. Failure of GMOs in India. Synthesis/Regeneration 33 (Winter). New Delhi, India: Research Foundation for Science, Technology and Ecology.
97. Shiva, V., A.H. Jafri, A. Emani, and M. Pande. 2000. Seeds of suicide: The ecological and human costs of globalization of agriculture. Delhi, India: Research Foundation for Science, Technology and Ecology.
98. Specter, M. 2009. Denialism. New York and London: Penguin.
99. Stone, G.D. 2012. Constructing Facts: Bt Cotton Narratives in India Economic and Political Weekly. September 22, 2012, xlvii, no. 38.
100. Stone, G.D. 2013. A response to Herring and Rao. Economic and Political Weekly, xlviii, no. 33 August 17.
101. Subramanian, A. 2007. Distributional effects of agricultural biotechnology in a village economy: The case of cotton in India. Gottingen: Cuvillier Verlag.
102. Subramanian, A., and M. Qaim. (2009). Village-wide effects of agricultural biotechnology: the case of Bt cotton in India. World Development 37, no. 1: 256–267.
103. Subramanian, A., and M. Qaim. (2010). The impact of Bt cotton on poor households in rural India. Journal of Development Studies 46, no. 2: 295–311.
104. Sunstein, C. 2009. On rumors. New York: Macmillan Publishers.
105. Tarrow, S. 2011. Power in movement. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
106. The Hindu. 2010. Consult scientists, not public, on Bt brinjal, Pawar told. The Hindu, April 24 2010. Available from http://www.thehindu.com/todays-paper/tp-national/tp-karnataka/consult-scientists-not-public-on-bt-brinjal-pawar-told/article755165.ece.
107. The Indian Express, 2010. Another Minister Speaks Up. The Indian Express, February 15 2010. Available from expressindia.indianexpress.com/story_print.php?storyId=579774. February 15.
108. Thies, J.E., and M.H. Devare. 2007. An ecological assessment of transgenic crops. Journal of Development Studies 43, no. 1: 97–129. doi: 10.1080/00220380601055593
109. Wesseler, J. and N. Kalaitzandonakes. 2011. Present and Future EU GMO policy. In A. Oskam, G. Meesters, and H. Silvis, eds., EU policy for agriculture, food and rural areas. Wageningen: Wageningen Academic Publishers, pp. 323–332.