Abstracts, Papers &

Resources:
Science & Technology

We’ve scanned the web to bring together a library of interesting, thought-provoking articles, blogs, reports and academic papers that explore the issue of genetic engineering in food and farming from broader and deeper perspectives. Browse for inspiration or search by theme.

FILTER BY:
Currently showing only Science & Technology Resources
Page 1 of 7
Legislation & RegulationScience & TechnologySustainability

Socio-economic assessment and genetically engineered crops in Africa: Building knowledge for development?

Brian Dowd-Uribe, Genowefa Blundo-Canto, Dominic Glover, Sélim Louafi, Helena Shilomboleni, Joeva Sean Rock, Enoch M. Kikulwe, Klara Fischer, Pierre-Benoît Joly
Publication date: 01/09/2024
VIEW ON EXTERNAL SITE

How could we know if agricultural development interventions make contributions to sustainable development goals (SDGs)? Genetically engineered (GE) crops are celebrated as a class of technological interventions that can realize multiple SDGs. But recent studies have revealed the gap between GE crop program goals and the approaches used to assess their impacts. Using four comprehensive reviews of GE crop socio-economic impacts, we identify common shortcomings across three themes: (a) scope, (b) approaches and (c) heterogeneity. We find that the evaluation sciences literature offers alternative assessment approaches that can enable evaluators to better assess impacts, and inform learning and decision-making. We recommend the use of methods that enable evaluations to look beyond the agronomic and productive effects of individual traits to understand wider socio-economic effects.

Resource type: article: Web Page
Plant & Animal BreedingScience & Technology

Predicted multispecies unintended effects from outdoor genome editing

Aline Martins Hoepers, Jack A. Heinemann, Caroline Bedin Zanatta, Philomena Chu, Tessa C. Hiscox, Sarah Zanon Agapito-Tenfen
Publication date: 01/09/2024
VIEW ON EXTERNAL SITE

Our aim was to assess potential activity in organisms that could be exposed to genome editing in uncontrolled environments. We developed three scenarios, using irrigation, fumigation and fertilization as delivery methods, based on outdoor uses in agriculture, namely pest and disease control. Using publicly available software , off-target effects were predicted in multiple species commonly found in the agroecosystem, including humans (16 of 38 (42 %) sampled). Metabolic enrichment analysis (gene IDs), by connecting off-target genes into a physiological network, predicted effects on the development of nervous and respiratory systems. Our findings emphasize the importance of exercising caution when considering the use of this genome editing in uncontrolled environments. Unintended genomic alterations may occur in unintended organisms, underscoring the significance of understanding potential hazards and implementing safety measures to protect human health and the environment.

Resource type: article: Web Page
Science & TechnologySustainability

Democratization through precision technologies? Unveiling power, participation, and property rights in the agricultural bioeconomy

Dr Sarah Hackfort
Publication date: 08/03/2024
VIEW ON EXTERNAL SITE

This piece addresses the political dimension of sustainability in the agricultural bioeconomy by focusing on power, participation, and property rights around key technologies. Bioeconomy policies aim to establish economic systems based on renewable resources such as plants and microorganisms to reduce dependence on fossil resources. To achieve this, they rely on economic growth and increased biomass production through high-tech innovations. This direction has sparked important critique of the environmental and social sustainability of such projects. However, little attention has been paid in the bioeconomy literature to the political dimension surrounding key precision technologies such as data-driven precision agriculture (PA) or precision breeding technologies using new genomic techniques (NGT). The political dimension includes questions of power, participation, and property rights regarding these technologies and the distribution of the benefits and burdens they generate. This lack of attention is particularly pertinent given the recurring and promising claims that precision technologies not only enhance environmental sustainability, but also contribute to the democratization of food and biomass production. This contribution addresses this claim in asking whether we can really speak of a democratization of the agricultural bioeconomy through these precision technologies. Drawing on (own) empirical research and historical evidence, it concludes that current patterns are neither driving nor indicative of a democratization. On the contrary, corporate control, unequal access, distribution, and property rights over data and patents point to few gains for small firms and breeders, but to a reproduction of farmers’ dependencies, and less transparency for consumers.

Resource type: article: Web Page
Science & TechnologyViewpoints

The societal roles and responsibilities of plant scientists in the context of genome-edited crops

Aisha M. So, Michelle G. J. L. Habets, Christa Testerink, Phil Macnaghten
Publication date: 31/01/2024
VIEW ON EXTERNAL SITE
The societal debate on the use of genome-edited crops has been polarised from the start. While policymakers struggle to democratically resolve this dilemma, plant scientists have been criticised for taking up advocative roles and thereby risking further polarisation. This study demonstrates how plant scientists themselves perceive their roles and responsibilities. Indeed, those scientists active in the debate were found to fulfil advocative roles, and there seems to be an underlying, persistent—and very traditional—view on roles and responsibilities of scientists within the community. Critical reflection on this view is required for better democratic dialogue and decision-making. More interdisciplinary interaction could facilitate this reflection.

Resource type: article: Web Page
Plant & Animal BreedingScience & Technology

Simulation of dual-purpose chicken breeding programs implementing gene editing

Edward Y. S. Chuang, Robin Wellmann, Franck L. B. Meijboom, Jens Tetens & Jörn Bennewitz
Publication date: 17/01/2024
VIEW ON EXTERNAL SITE

The paper considered the possibility of using gene editing to accelerate progress towards dual purpose chickens, thus eliminating the need for male culling. Our simulation demonstrated a general increase in genetic gain when genomic selection is used together with GE. The overall benefit of GE erased after some generations because the large-effect alleles became fixed. Hence, GE could be beneficial only when alleles with reasonable effect sizes are segregating and detectable. When the consumer preference and the price difference between the genome-edited chicken and the other chickens were to be considered, the findings from this study might not be sufficient to recommend the use of GE in breeding programs for quantitative traits.”

Resource type: article: Web Page
FarmingScience & TechnologySustainability

Remote Control and Peasant Intelligence – On Automating Decisions, Suppressing Knowledges and Transforming Ways of Knowing

FIAN International, Friends of the Earth Europe and Coventry University's Centre for Agroecology, Water and Resilience,
Publication date: 14/11/2023
VIEW ON EXTERNAL SITE

Digital technologies are often touted as a silver bullet to respond to the interconnected crises of food, climate and biodiversity. Although they are presented by their promoters in governments and corporations as a necessary tool for innovation and for making food systems more efficient and sustainable, the reality is much more complex.

This report examines the implications of digital technologies taking hold in European agriculture. It focuses particularly on frictions between new digital technologies and peasant autonomy, agroecology and food sovereignty.

Technologies are not mute objects. Their development, distribution and use are inextricably linked to economic and political interests, cultural meanings, different types of knowledge as well as social and ecological relationships. In a context where money, technological know-how and power are highly concentrated in the hands of a few large companies and countries, the digitalization of food and agriculture is set to reinforce inequalities and discrimination.

Resource type: article: Web Page
FarmingScience & Technology

Measuring agroecology: Introducing a methodological framework and a community of practice approach

Nina Isabella Moeller, Matthias Geck, Colin Anderson, Carlos Barahona, Caroline Broudic, Remi Cluset, Gisele Henriques, Fabio Leippert, Dave Mills, Ameen Minhaj, Anja Mueting-van Loon, Stephanie Piers de Raveschoot, Emile Frison
Publication date: 03/11/2023
VIEW ON EXTERNAL SITE

. In this article, we report on a process of collaboratively developing a methodological framework, using the High Level Panel of Experts of the Committee on World Food Security 13 principles of agroecology as foundation. This framework overcomes some limitations of previous methodologies for evaluating degrees of agroecological integration (including those using Gliessman’s 5 levels of food system change) and facilitates a robust qualitative assessment of projects, programs, and project portfolios with respect to their “agroecologicalness.” The framework conceives of agroecology as paradigm-shifting rather than as incremental improvements to existing food systems. It enables global comparability as well as local contextualization of each principle. While the need for this framework arose from the desire to monitor—and increase—financial support for an urgently needed transformation toward agroecology, the framework can equally contribute to the design of projects and programs, which aim to radically transform food and farming systems. It also has value as an educational tool, in specifying through statements of value and concrete examples, what agroecological work aims at.

Resource type: article: Web Page
FarmingPlant & Animal BreedingScience & TechnologySustainability

Genetic modification can improve crop yields — but stop overselling it

Merritt Khaipho-Burch, Mark Cooper, Jose Crossa, Natalia de Leon, James Holland, Ramsey Lewis, Susan McCouch, Seth C. Murray, Ismail Rabbi, Pamela Ronald, Jeffrey Ross-Ibarra, Detlef Weigel & Edward S. Buckler
Publication date: 20/09/2023
VIEW ON EXTERNAL SITE
Over the past two decades, many journals have published papers describing how modifying one or a few genes can result in substantial increases in crop yields. The reported increases range from 10% to 68%, and the crops analysed include rice, maize (corn), tobacco and soya bean.
These studies have contributed important insights in molecular biology and gene discovery. But many are the results of tests conducted in greenhouses or in small-scale field trials — the latter typically involving plants grown in small plots. Few, if any, have used the experimental designs needed to evaluate crop performance in real-world environments. And hardly any findings have translated into yield increases on actual farms.
Especially in the context of climate change and a growing human population, the growth of misleading claims around yields has become a cause of concern to us.
Resource type: article: Web Page
Plant & Animal BreedingScience & TechnologySustainability

Gene Editing: the Ethical Questions

Ralph Early (Food Ethics Council)
Publication date: 28/07/2023
VIEW ON EXTERNAL SITE

This blog employs a food ethics lens to delve into some of the ethical issues surrounding gene-editing, assessing intended and unintended consequences. Issues discussed include patents, herbicide-tolerant traits, gene drives and food safety.

Resource type: article: Web Page
FarmingLegislation & RegulationScience & Technology

Beyond the Genome: Genetically Modified Crops in Africa and the Implications for Genome Editing

Joeva Sean Rock, Matthew A. Schnurr, Ann Kingiri, Dominic Glover, Glenn Davis Stone, Adrian Ely, Klara Fischer
Publication date: 01/01/2023
VIEW ON EXTERNAL SITE

This article makes two interventions. First, it identifies the discursive continuity linking genome editing and the earlier technology of genetic modification. Second, it offers a suite of recommendations regarding how lessons learned from GM crops might be integrated into future breeding programmes focused on genome editing. Ultimately, the authors argue that donors, policymakers and scientists should move beyond the genome towards systems-level thinking by prioritizing the co-development of technologies with farmers; using plant material that is unencumbered by intellectual property restrictions and therefore accessible to resource-poor farmers; and acknowledging that seeds are components of complex and dynamic agroecological production systems. If these lessons are not heeded, genome-editing projects are in danger of repeating mistakes of the past

Resource type: article: Web Page