Business and biotechnology: regulation of GM crops and the politics of influence

Agribusiness and Society: Corporate responses to environmentalism, market opportunities and public regulation

Volumn , Issue , 2008, Pages 200-231

  Glover, Dominic ^a   Newell, Peter ^a  

^a INSTITUTE OF DEVELOPMENT STUDIES   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 85187618580     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Book    
DOI: None     Document Type: Chapter

References (67)

1. AgbioIndia (2002) ‘Welcome to the Revolving Door’. (15 July).
2. Agence France Presse (2002) ‘Western Canada Organic Farmers Sue Monsanto, Aventis Over Modified Canola’, (11 January).
3. AIBA Report (2000) Biotechnology Parks. Delhi: AIBA.
4. Aventis (2000) ‘Aventis CropScience. Our position on … ’
5. Barrett, K. and E. Abergel (2000) ‘Breeding Familiarity: Environmental Risk Assessment for Genetically Engineered Crops in Canada’, Science and Public Policy 27 (1): 2–12.
6. Benbrook, C. (2001a) When Does It Pay to Plant Bt Corn? Farm-Level Economic of Bt Corn, 1996–2001. Institute for Agriculture and Trade Policy and Genetically Engineered Food Alert. (3 January).
7. Benbrook, C. (2001b) ‘Do GM Crops Mean Less Pesticides?’ Pesticide Outlook 12 (5): 204–7, and at (28 February 2002).
8. Bendell, J. (2000) ‘Civil Regulation: A New Form of Democratic Governance for the Global Economy?’, in J. Bendell (ed.), Terms for Endearment: Business, NGOs and Sustainable Development, pp. 239–66. Sheffield, UK: Greenleaf.
9. Black, J. (1998) ‘Regulation as Facilitation: Negotiating the Genetic Revolution’, Modern Law Review 61 (5): 621–60.
10. Brac de la Perrière, R. A. and F. Seuret (2000) Brave New Seeds: The Threat of GM Crops to Farmers. London: Zed Books.
11. Cantley, M. F. (1995) ‘The Regulation of Modern Biotechnology: A Historical and European Perspective’, in D. Brauer (ed.), Volume 12: Legal, Economic and Ethical Dimensions, of H.-J. Rehm and G. Reed with A. Pühler and P. Stadler (eds), Biotechnology. Weinheim: VCH.
12. 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: 29–39.
13. CBD Secretariat (2000) Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety to the Convention on Biological Diversity. Montreal: Secretariat to the Convention on Biological Diversity.
14. CBD Secretariat (2001) ‘Report of the Intergovernmental Committee for the Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety on the Work of Its Second Meeting’. UNEP/CBD/ICCP/2/15. (11 January 2002).
15. Center for Food Safety (1999) ‘Greenpeace, Center for Food Safety and Organic Farmers Sue EPA over Gene-Altered Crops’. Press release (18 February). (9 January 2002).
16. Center for Food Safety (2002) ‘About Us’. (16 January).
17. Charles, D. (2001). Lords of the Harvest. Biotech, Big Money, and the Future of Food. Cambridge, MA: Perseus.
18. Chase, B. (1999) ‘Gene-Altered Crops are Trouble in the Wind for Organic Foods’ (11 August). (9 January 2002).
19. CorporateWatch (2000) GE Briefing: Aventis. (13 October).
20. Crompton, T. and T. Wakeford (1998) ‘Socio-Economics and the Protocol on Biosafety’, Nature Biotechnology 16: 697–8.
21. Cropchoice.com (2001a) ‘ND Farmer, Organic Certifier Calls for Farmers to Organize Against Monsanto over GM Crop Contamination’. Cropchoice guest opinion (8 October). (3 January 2002).
22. Cropchoice.com (2001b) ‘Saskatchewan Organic Farmers Likely to Launch Lawsuit over Transgenic Contamination’. Cropchoice news (26 October). (3 January 2002).
23. Dunlop, C. (2000) ‘GMOs and Regulatory Styles’, Environmental Politics 9 (2): 149–55.
24. Endres, A. B. (2000) ‘“GMO”: Genetically Modified Organism or Gigantic Monetary Obligation? The Liability Schemes for GMO Damage in the United States and the European Union’, Loyola of Los Angeles International and Comparative Law Review 22: 453–505, fnn.
25. Ferrara, J. (1998) ‘Revolving Doors: Monsanto and the Regulators’, The Ecologist 28 (5) (September/October).
26. FET (Foundation on Economic Trends) (1999) ‘Landmark Class-Action Antitrust Lawsuit Filed Against Monsanto’. Press release (14 December). (9 January 2002).
27. Friends of the Earth UK (2001) ‘GM Weeds Finally Destroyed’. Press release (7 December). (1 March 2002).
28. Gaia Trust (2000) ‘NFU Mutual Won’t Insure GM Crop Trial Risks’. Press release (10 March). (27 February 2002).
29. Goldsmith, Z. (1998) ‘Who Are the Real Terrorists?’, The Ecologist 28 (5): 312–17.
30. Gottweis, H. (1995) Governing Molecules: The Discursive Politics of Genetic Engineering in Europe and the United States. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
31. Greenpeace UK (2002) ‘The Greenpeace 28 Go on Trial in Norfolk on April 3rd 2000’. (16 January).
32. Hindu, The (2001) ‘India: NGO Moves’, The Hindu (23 November). <(biotech_activists@iatp.org> (24 November).
33. Jasanoff, S. (1995) ‘Product, Process or Programme: Three Cultures and the Regulation of Biotechnology’, in M. Bauer (ed.), Resistance to New Technology, pp. 311–31. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press/National Museum of Science and Industry.
34. Kingsnorth, P. (1999) ‘India Cheers While Monsanto Burns’, The Ecologist 29 (1): 9–10.
35. Knight, D. (2000) ‘Who’s Liable for Damages from GMO Crops?’. Inter Press Service/South-North Development Monitor (SUNS) (25 February). (9 January 2002).
36. Kossick, D. (2002) ‘Organic Farmers Sue Monsanto and Aventis’. (12 January).
37. Lee, K., D. Humphreys and M. Pugh (1997) ‘Privatisation in the United Nations System: Patterns of Influence in Three Intergovernmental Organisations’, Global Society 11 (3): 339–59.
38. Levidow, L. and S. Carr (2000) ‘UK: Precautionary Commercialisation?’ Journal of Risk Research 3 (3): 261–71.
39. Levidow, L. and J. Tait (1995) ‘The Greening of Biotechnology: GMOs as Environment-Friendly Products’, in I. Moser and V. Shiva (eds), Biopolitics: A Feminist and Ecological Reader on Biotechnology, pp. 121–39. London: Zed Books.
40. Levidow, L., S. Carr, R. Von Schomberg and D. Wield (1996) ‘Regulating Biotech nology in Europe: Harmonisation Difficulties, Opportunities and Dilemmas’, Science and Public Policy 23 (3): 135–57.
41. Levy, D. L. and P. Newell (2000) ‘Oceans Apart? Business Responses to Global Environmental Issues in Europe and the United States’, Environment 42 (9): 8–20.
42. Mandler, J. P. and K. R. Eads (2000) ‘Liability Exposure to Seed Companies from Adventitious GMO Pollination Due to Pollen Drift Resulting in Cross Pollination or Outcrossing’. Legal assessment (26 January). Minneapolis, Desmoines and Denver: Faegre and Benson LLP. (19 December 2001).
43. MASIPAG (2001) ‘800 Protesters Uproot Bt corn in Mindanao’, Masipag News & Views (29 August). (3 January 2002).
44. Meridian Institute (2001) ‘Liability and Redress under the Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety’. Detailed summary from a dialogue workshop, 11–13 September 2001. (11 January 2002).
45. Miller, H. I. (1999). ‘The Real Curse of Frankenfood’, Nature Biotechnology 17 (2): 113.
46. Miller, H. I. and S. L. Huttner (1998) ‘A Baroque Solution to a Nonproblem’, Nature Biotechnology 16: 698–9.
47. Minnesota Planning (2001) ‘Are Farmers or Biotech Seed Companies Liable for “Genetic Drift”?’, Minnesota IssueWatch agriculture briefing, June. (28 February 2002).
48. Moeller, D. R. (2001) ‘GMO Liability Threats for Farmers’, Institute for Agriculture and Trade Policy and Genetically Engineered Food Alert. (3 January 2002).
49. National Academy of Sciences (NAS) (US) (2002) Environmental Effects of Transgenic Plants: The Scope and Adequacy of Regulation. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
50. Newell, P. (2000) ‘Environmental NGOs and Globalization’, in R. Cohen and S. Rai (eds), Global Social Movements, pp. 117–34. New Jersey: Athlone Press.
51. Newell, P. (2001a) ‘Managing Multinationals: The Governance of Investment for the Environment’, Journal of International Development 13 (7): 907–19.
52. Newell, P. (2001b) ‘Biotechnology for the Poor?’ Science as Culture 10 (2): 249–54.
53. Newell, P. (2002) Biotechnology and the Politics of Regulation. IDS Working Paper 146, Brighton: IDS.
54. Newell, P. and R. Mackenzie (2000) ‘The Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety: Legal and Political Dimensions’, Global Environmental Change 10: 313–17.
55. OECD (1992) Safety Considerations for Biotechnology. Paris: OECD.
56. Pimbert, M., T. Wakeford and P. V. Satheesh (2001) ‘Citizens’ Juries on GMOs and Farming Futures in India’, LEISA (Low External Input and Sustainable Agriculture) 17 (4): 27–30.
57. Repp, R. A. (2000) ‘Comment: Biotech Pollution: Assessing Liability for Genetically Modified Crop Production and Genetic Drift’, Idaho Law Review 36: 585–620, fnn.
58. Robson, S. (2002) ‘Raid Ruins Research Lab Crops’. <(biotech_activists@iatp. org> (14 January).
59. Sell, S. K. (1999) ‘Multinational Corporations as Agents of Change: The Globalization of Intellectual Property Rights’, in C. Cutler, V. Haufler and T. Porter (eds), Private Authority and International Affairs, pp. 169–97. Albany: State University of New York Press.
60. Shadid, A. (2001) ‘Blown Profits. Genetic Drift Affects More than Biology – US Farmers Stand to Lose Millions’, Boston Globe (8 April): G1. (19 December).
61. Srinivas, R. (2002) ‘Bt Cotton in India: Economic Factors Versus Environmental Concerns’, Environmental Politics 11 (2): 154–8.
62. Stabinsky, D. (2000) ‘Bringing Social Analysis into a Multilateral Environmental Agreement: Social Impact Assessment and the Biosafety Protocol’, Journal of Environment and Development 9 (3): 260–83.
63. Times of India (2001) ‘Bt Cotton Seed Sellers Face Arrest’, Times of India(23 November). (24 November).
64. Toft, J. (2000) ‘Denmark: Potential Polarisation or Consensus?’ Journal of Risk Research 3 (3): 227–37.
65. Villar, J. L. (2001) GMO Contamination Around the World, Amsterdam: Friends of the Earth International.
66. Wilde, M. L. (1998). ‘The Law of Tort and the “Precautionary Principle”: Civil Liability Issues Arising from Trial Plantings of Genetically Modified (GM) Crops’, Environmental Liability 6: 163–75.
67. WWF International (2001) ‘The Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety: Implementation Now!’ Position document for the Second Meeting of the Intergovernmental Committee for the Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety (ICCP-2) Nairobi, Kenya, 1–5 October 2001.