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.

Currently showing only Sustainability Resources
Page 1 of 5

Robots in agriculture – A case-based discussion of ethical concerns on job loss, responsibility, and data control

Publication date: 01/12/2024
There is a growing interest in using robots in agriculture due to increasing challenges of labour scarcity and cost. Field robots are expected to help overcome these challenges and to contribute to financial, environmental and social sustainability. However, socially responsible introduction of field crop robots will require awareness and consideration of ethical trade-offs by stakeholders including farmers, regulators, and manufacturers. In this article we discuss the ethical themes of job loss, moral responsibility, and data control in light of the results of sixteen interviews with key stakeholders conducted in 2022 under a European research project named Robs4crops.
Resource type: article: Web Page

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

Publication date: 01/09/2024

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

Responsible development of digital livestock technologies for agricultural challenges

Publication date: 28/08/2024

Digital livestock technologies (DLTs) are presented as solutions to grand challenges in post-Brexit British agricultural policy, such as climate change and food security. Evidence suggests technological solutions to agricultural challenges will be more effective with stakeholder and public engagement, yet there is little known about stakeholder views on these emerging technologies. We drew on responsible research and innovation, to analyse stakeholder perspectives on three case studies of DLT development through anticipatory focus groups with expert stakeholders in British animal agriculture. We found that stakeholders from broadly agroecological approaches to farming are at risk of exclusion from DLT development and policy, with negative implications for the ability of DLTs to resolve grand challenges in animal agriculture.

Resource type: article: Web Page

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

Publication date: 08/03/2024

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

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

Publication date: 14/11/2023

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

Genetic modification can improve crop yields — but stop overselling it

Publication date: 20/09/2023
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

The EU legislative framework for a sustainable food system: How can it effectively deliver for the environment and people?

Publication date: 08/09/2023

In its Farm to Fork Strategy, the European Commission announced that it will present a legislative framework for a sustainable food system, an initiative expected for the third quarter of 2023.

The vision reflected in the law proposal will have a critical impact on the EU’s capacity to build its resilience against the worsening climate and biodiversity crises while guaranteeing long-term accessibility to healthy food.

The briefing presents solutions in the form of actionable tools that can best ensure the swift implementation of a sustainable EU food system on the ground. The European Commission must go ahead with its proposal and publish it in September 2023; there is no better time.

Resource type: article: Web Page

Gene Editing: the Ethical Questions

Publication date: 28/07/2023

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

Identifying sustainability assessment parameters for genetically engineered agrifoods

Publication date: 22/07/2023

This Opinion article argues that to achieve a more sustainable agrifood production that relies on genetic engineering, governance systems related to new agrifood biotechnologies should incorporate a broader array of environmental, health, ethical, and societal factors to ensure their sustainability in the long-term. To facilitate this process, we propose a set of parameters to help evaluate the sustainability of agrifoods that rely on genetic engineering. We then discuss major challenges and opportunities for formalizing sustainability parameters in US governance policy and decision-making systems. Overall, this work contributes to further developing a more comprehensive assessment framework that aims to minimize potential risks and maximize potential benefits of agrifood biotechnology while also fostering sustainability.

Resource type: article: Web Page

With great power comes great responsibility: why ‘safe enough’ is not good enough in debates on new gene technologies

Publication date: 25/10/2022

To avoid past mistakes of under- or miscommunication about possible impacts, we need open, transparent, and inclusive societal debate on the nature of the science of gene (editing) technologies, on how to use them, and whether they contribute to sustainable solutions to societal and environmental challenges. To be trustworthy, GMO regulation must demonstrate the authorities’ ability to manage the scientific, socio-economic, environmental, and ethical complexities and uncertainties associated with NGTs. Regulators and authorities should give equal attention to the reflexive and the emotional aspects of trust and make room for honest public and stakeholder inclusion processes.

Resource type: article: Web Page