This article analyses the mechanisms governing the extraction, circulation, and distribution of rent in the biotech industry. Building on recent scholarship, it contributes to debates surrounding the importance of rent in technoscientific capitalism. It analyses genome editing as a global labour process. It interrogates how CRISPR technologies cement and expand neocolonial geographies of rent extraction, privatising the economic benefits and socialising the ecological risks. It argues that an increasingly monopolistic corporate biopower mediates how genome editing technologies are developed, and which mutant ecologies are socially produced.
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.
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.
Society should be asking itself why it needs to trade the security of its regulations for unsecured promises from the visions of genetic engineers, argues molecular biologist Jack Heinemann.
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.
The expansion of do-it-yourself (DIY) gene editing, facilitated by Clustered Regularly Interspaced Short Palindromic Repeats (CRISPR) technology, has catalyzed a significant shift in scientific research and biotechnology innovation. This movement is propelled by a community-driven approach that challenges the traditional confines of scientific exploration, allowing amateur scientists to perform sophisticated biological experiments. While this democratization fosters inclusivity and accelerates innovation, it simultaneously introduces significant biosecurity risks. The possibility of unregulated gene editing leading to the unintentional creation of harmful organisms or the deliberate engineering of pathogens underscores the need for a new regulatory framework. This paper explores the implications of DIY biology within the context of public health, environmental safety, and biosecurity, highlighting the urgency for adaptive policies that balance scientific freedom with security. It proposes integrating community-driven regulatory practices with formal oversight mechanisms by examining biosecurity implications, ethical considerations, and the potential for misuse. Additionally, the role of decentralized autonomous organizations (DAOs) is explored as a novel approach to transforming governance within the domain of DIY gene editing, particularly in the context of CRISPR research.
The use of genetic engineering is increasingly discussed for nature conservation. At the same time, recent animal ethics approaches debate whether humans should genetically engineer wild animals to improve their welfare. This paper examines if obligations towards wild sentient animals require humans to genetically engineering wild animals, while arguing that there is no moral need to do so. The focus is on arguments from animal ethics, but they are linked to conservation ethics, highlighting the often neglected overlap between the two fields. The paper emphasizes that a) the benefits of genetic engineering are overestimated and at the same time harms from its development and use underestimated, b) the assumption that genetic engineering is an appropriate ‘last resort’ tool is wrong, c) many arguments in favor of genetic engineering are based on an inadequate understanding of ecology and bio- technological processes, and d) the debate downplays the importance of self-determination for wild animals.
Transgenic, dicamba-resistant soybean and cotton were developed to enable farmers to combat weeds that had evolved resistance to the herbicide glyphosate. The dramatic increases in dicamba use these crops facilitated have led to serious problems, including the evolution of dicamba-resistant weeds and widespread damage to susceptible crops and farming communities. Disturbingly, this pattern of dicamba use has unfolded while the total herbicide applied to soybean has nearly doubled since 2006. Without substantive changes to agricultural policy and decision making, the next ‘silver-bullet’ agrotechnology will likely be no more than another step on the transgene-facilitated herbicide treadmill.
