Transcript GMO topic Recap/Wrap-up - University of Washington

LECTURE
GEOG 270
Fall 2007
December 3, 2007
Joe Hannah, PhD
Department of Geography
University of Washington
GMO Recap and Wrap-up
Last Time
► Food
Security (“chameleon word” –
saturated with politics!)
► Debate: GMOs and hunger (“Naming and
Framing”)
► Case
study from Zerbe article: southern
Africa food crisis (2002), American food Aid,
and local policy responses
GMO topic Recap/Wrap-up
► “Green
Revolution”
► “Gene Revolution” (GMO crops)
Green Revolution
► Malthusian
Premise: While we work on
► Remember
the context of the 1960s:
reducing fertility, we can also increase food
production
 Erhlich’s Population Bomb
 “Modernization” and the promise of technology
► Scientific,
plant-breeding approach -- HYVs
HYV Characteristics
► large-yield,
► dwarf
stock,
► disease and pest
resistant (among other
things)
►
Hybrid crops – can’t
collect seeds
Top-down
► Started
by Governments and Foundations (like
Rockefeller),
 Not “requested” by Third World farmers
► Later
largely financed by WB, UN (FAO, UNDP,
UNEP)
► Set up plant breading and other research projects
Essentially a Keynesian approach to development.
Critiques of the Green Revolution
Increased use of
chemicals, water,
mechanization
► Water pollution, other
environmental problems
► Monocultures, decreased
biodiversity
►
►
►
►
Economics favored rich farmers
Technologies encouraged increased debt and
consequent land consolidation
Broke down social relations in communities,
increased conflict
“Gene Revolution”
►
►
►
►
Combining genes from one species with
another to create specific traits
Undertaken by private companies
Originally (and fundamentally) a
technology developed for profit
Malthusian and humanitarian arguments
as well
Essentially a Neo-liberal approach to development.
I. GMO Basic Science:
e.g., Bacillus thuringiensis (Bt)
http://www.scq.ubc.ca/?p=262
http://www.biotech.iastate.edu/biotech_info_series/bio9.html
http://www.ent.iastate.edu/imagegal/plantpath/corn/ecb/bteardam.html
GMO Basic Science:
e.g., “Roundup Ready”
II. “Naming and Framing” in the
GMO Debate
e.g., McGloughlin vs. Altieri & Rossett
Food Security / Feeding the World
► Increased yields – fact or fiction?
► Environmental risk
► Capitalism & Farm Incomes
►
III. Resistance and Social Movements:
Kacy McKinney’s talk on
MST, Land and GMOs in Brazil
Interesting case of
stakeholder response
► “Landless Peasants”
►
“Land should be used to
fulfill its larger social
functions.”
GMOs: A threat? A rallying point?
►
►
►
GMOs promoted by MNCs:
“Privatization of development?”
► Roles of state, corporations,
social movements: Peaceful?
Violent?
►
Against legalization of
GMOs (successful until 2004)
Lobby, demonstrate, raise
awareness
Exposed illegal plantings
IV. Three Criteria for GMO Business
GMOs
Law
Essentially a Neo-liberal approach to development.
Three Criteria
► Science
(expensive, risky investments,
located in the First-World)
► Profits (corporations: recoup investments,
expand markets)
► Law
 IPR
 “Free trade”
 “Permissive” environment
V. Policy Responses in Third World
Countries
► Countries
must respond to pressures to
adopt GMOs
► Policy responses are complex – corporate
lobbying, trade policy, bilateral relations,
responses of diverse interests within the
country
► Neo-liberal/Keynesian?
Precautionary/Permissive? (e.g. US vs. Europe)
“Permissive” vs. “Precautionary”
Approaches
► “Permissive
Approach” favors allowing an
activity to continue until proof of either no
effect or a negative impact is obtained.
► “Precautionary” approach favors
constraining an activity when there is high
scientific uncertainty regarding its effects on
the natural environment;
VI. Food Security and Food Aid
► What
is Food Security?
► GMOs and Food Security debate:
 “Food gap” & “Productivity gap” vs.
 Need soc-political change, not commercialized
technology
► Case
study of Southern Africa food crisis:
different countries, different GMO policy
responses
The GMO Issue: Unresolved
► What
should be done?
► Should Third World countries be encouraged
to adopt? (increased yields, less chemicals,
etc.)
► Or should they resist? (unknown effects,
genetic pollution, food safety, etc.)
► What about US domestic policy? (labeling,
subsidies to farmers, food aid, etc.)
The Global Food System
► Shiva:
Global food supply has been
“hijacked” by corporate interests:
► Neo-liberal approach to food distribution
(exemplified by GMOs and “privatized
development”) makes the marginalized more
vulnerable, leads to more hunger and more
violence
► Should food be a commodity or a right?