Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

Opposition to transgenic technologies: ideology, interests and collective action frames

Abstract

Genetic engineering has enabled significant, accepted innovations in medicine and other fields. In agriculture, however, a global cognitive divide around 'genetically modified organisms' (GMOs) has limited the diffusion and scope of this technology. The framing of agricultural products of recombinant DNA technology as GMOs lacks biological coherence, but has proved to be a powerful frame for opposition. Disaggregating the concept of the 'GMO' is a necessary condition for confronting misconceptions that constrain the use of biotechnology in addressing imperatives of development and escalating challenges from nature, especially in less-industrialized nations.

This is a preview of subscription content

Access options

Buy article

Get time limited or full article access on ReadCube.

$32.00

All prices are NET prices.

Figure 1: Global distribution of transgenic crop production, 1996–2007.
Figure 2: Global transgenic crop production by trait, 1996–2007.

References

  1. Herring, R. J. (ed.) Transgenics and the Poor: Biotechnology in Development Studies (Routledge, Oxford, 2007).

    Google Scholar 

  2. Bouis, H. The potential of genetically modified food crops to improve human nutrition in developing countries. J. Dev. Stud. 43, 79–96 (2007).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Zilberman, D., Ameden, H. & Qaim, M. The impact of agricultural biotechnology on yields, risks, and biodiversity in low-income countries. J. Dev. Stud. 43, 63–78 (2007).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Narayanamoorthy, A. & Kalamkar, S. S. Is Bt cotton cultivation economically viable for Indian farmers? An empirical analysis. Econ. Polit. Wkly 41, 2716–2724 (2006).

    Google Scholar 

  5. Persley, G. J. & Lantin, M. M. (eds) Agricultural Biotechnology and the Poor: Proceedings of an International Conference, Washington, D. C., 21–22 October 1999 (Consultative Group on International Agricultural Research, Washington, 2000).

    Google Scholar 

  6. Horsch, R. B. & Fraley, R. T. in Protection of Global Biodiversity: Converging Strategies (eds Guruswamy L. D. & McNeely, J. A.) 180–189 (Duke Univ. Press, Durham, North Carolina, 1998).

    Google Scholar 

  7. Murray, F. & Stern, S. in Innovation Policy and the Economy Vol. 7 Ch. 2 (eds Jaffe, A. B., Lerner, J. & Stern, S.) 32–69 (MIT Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts, 2006)

    Google Scholar 

  8. Paarlberg, R. L. Starved for Science: How Biotechnology is Being Kept Out of Africa (Harvard Univ. Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts, 2008).

    Book  Google Scholar 

  9. [No author listed], España rechaza la cláusula de salvaguarda de Francia al maíz transgénico, Besanda Portal Agrario [online], (2008) (in Spanish).

  10. Nick Antonovics, N. & Fichot, N. (ed. Channing, R. ) French govt move to ban Monsanto GMO draws fire Reuters UK [online], (2008).

    Google Scholar 

  11. Herring, R. J. Stealth seeds: biosafety, bioproperty, biopolitics. J. Dev. Stud. 43, 130–157 (2007).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Devparna, R., Herring, R. J. & Geisler, C. C. Naturalizing transgenics: loose seeds, official seeds, and risk in the decision matrix of Gujarati cotton farmers. J. Dev. Stud. 43, 158–176 (2007).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Jayaraman, K. S. India produces homegrown GM cotton. Nature Biotechnol. 22, 255–256 (2004).

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Gupta, A. K. & Chandak, V. Agricultural biotechnology in India: ethics, business and politics. Int. J. Biotechnol. 7, 212–227 (2005).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Naim, M. Illicit: How Smugglers, Traffickers and Copycats are Hijacking the Global Economy (Doubleday, New York, 2005).

    Google Scholar 

  16. Borlaug, N. E. Challenges facing Crop Scientists in the 21st Century. American Society of Agronomy Annual Meeting November 3–5, 2007 New Orleans, Louisiana. ASC meetings [online], (2007).

    Google Scholar 

  17. Conway, G. The Doubly Green Revolution: Food for All in the Twenty-First Century (Cornell Univ. Press, Ithaca, New York, 1999).

    Google Scholar 

  18. Snow, D. & Benford, R. D. in Frontiers in Social Movement Theory Ch. 6 (eds Morris, A. D. & Carol McClurg Mueller, C.) (Yale Univ. Press, New Haven & London, 1992).

    Google Scholar 

  19. Snow, D. & Benford, R. D. Framing processes and social movements: an overview and assessment. Annu. Rev. Sociol. 26, 611–639 (2000).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Tarrow, S. 1992. in Frontiers in Social Movement Research (eds Morris, A. & Mueller, C.) (Yale Univ. Press, New Haven, Connecticut, 1992).

    Google Scholar 

  21. Snow, D. A. in The Blackwell Companion to Social Movements (eds Snow, D. A., Soule, S. A & Kreisi, H.) 380–413 (Blackwell Publishing, Oxford, 2004).

    Book  Google Scholar 

  22. della Porta, D. & Kriesi, H. in Social Movements in a Globalizing World (eds della Porta, D., Kriesi, H. & Rucht, D.) 3–23 (St. Martin's, New York, 1999).

    Book  Google Scholar 

  23. Tarrow, S. The New Transnational Activism (Cambridge Univ. Press, New York, 2005).

    Book  Google Scholar 

  24. Snow, D. A., Soule, S. A. & Kriesi, H. (eds) The Blackwell Companion to Social Movements (Blackwell Publishing, Oxford, 2004).

    Book  Google Scholar 

  25. Herring, R. J. in Sage Handbook on Environment and Society (eds Pretty, J. et al.) 299–313 (Sage Publications, London, 2007).

    Book  Google Scholar 

  26. McHughen, A. Pandora's Picnic Basket: The Potential and Hazards of Genetically Modified Foods (Oxford Univ. Press, Oxford, 2000).

    Google Scholar 

  27. Winston, M. L. Travels in the Genetically Modified Zone (Harvard Univ. Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts, 2002).

    Google Scholar 

  28. Thies, J. E. & Devare, M. H. An ecological assessment of transgenic crops. J. Dev. Stud. 43, 97–129 (2007).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Boal, I. A. in Violent Environments (eds Lee Peluso, N. & Watts, M.) 155–185 (Cornell Univ. Press, Ithaca, New York, 2001).

    Google Scholar 

  30. Shiva, V., Emani, A. & Jafri, A. H. Globalization and threat to seed security Econ. Polit. Wkly 34, 601–613 (1999).

    Google Scholar 

  31. Shelton, A. M. Considerations on the use of transgenic crops for insect control J. Dev. Stud. 43, 890–900 (2007).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Herring, R. J. The genomics revolution and development studies: science, politics and poverty. J. Dev. Stud. 43, 1–30 (2007).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Paarlberg, R. L. The Politics of Precaution: Genetically Modified Crops in Developing Countries (Johns Hopkins Univ. Press, Baltimore, 2001).

    Google Scholar 

  34. Pray, C. E. & Naseem, A. Supplying crop biotechnology to the poor: opportunities and constraints. J. Dev. Stud. 43, 192–217 (2007).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. [No author listed], Genetic Use Restriction Technologies (GURTs) Convention on Biological Diversity [online], (2006).

  36. The European Parliament and The Council. Off. J. Eur. Commun. L106, 1–38 (2001).

  37. Miller, H. I. & Conko, G. The Science of Biotechnology Meets the Politics of Global Regulation. Issues in Science and Technology [online], (2000).

    Google Scholar 

  38. Fujii, M., Andoh, C & Ishihara, S. Drought resistance of NERICA (New Rice for Africa) compared with Oryza sativa L. and millet evaluated by stomatal conductance and soil water content. International Crop Science Congress [online], (2004).

    Google Scholar 

  39. Andersson, J. O. Lateral gene transfer in eukaryotes. Cell. Mol. Life Sci. 62, 1182–97 (2005).

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  40. Batista, R., Saibo, N., Lourenc, T. & Oliveira, M. M. Microarray analyses reveal that plant mutagenesis may induce more transcriptomic changes than transgene insertion. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 105, 3640–3645 (2008).

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  41. Tait, J. More Faust than Frankenstein: the European debate about the precautionary principle and risk regulation for genetically modified crops. J. Risk Res. 4, 75–189 (2001).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  42. Chataway, J., Tait, J. & Wield, D. The governance of agro- and pharmaceutical biotechnology innovation: public policy and industrial strategy. Tech. Anal. Strat. Manag. 18, 69–185 (2006).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  43. Bonny, S. Why are most Europeans opposed to GMOs? Factors explaining rejection in France and Europe. Electron. J. Biotechnol. 6, [online], (2003).

  44. Fukuda-Parr, S. (ed.) The Gene Revolution: GM Crops and Unequal Development (Earthscan, London, 2007).

    Google Scholar 

  45. Pinstrup-Anderson, P. & Schiøler, E. Seeds of Contention: World Hunger and the Global Controversy over GM Crops (Johns Hopkins Univ. Press, Baltimore, 2000).

    Google Scholar 

  46. Gaskell, G. et al. Europeans and Biotechnology in 2005: Patterns and Trends. A report to the European Commission's Directorate-General for Research. EU Commission, Brussels [online], (2006).

    Google Scholar 

  47. Council for Biotechnology Information. Substantial Equivalence in Food Safety Assessment. Council for Biotechnology Information [online], (2001).

  48. Schurman, R. Fighting 'Frankenfoods': industry opportunity structures and the efficacy of the anti-biotech movement in western Europe. Soc. Probl. 51, 243–268 (2004).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  49. Schurman, R. & Munro, W. Ideas, thinkers and social networks: the process of grievance construction in the anti-genetic engineering movement. Theory Soc. 35, 1–38 (2006).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  50. Sato, K. Meanings of Genetically Modified Food and Policy Change and Persistence: the Cases of France, Japan and the United States. Princeton Univ. Princeton (2007).

    Google Scholar 

  51. Lezaun, J. Genetically Modified Foods and Consumer Mobilization in the UK. Technikfolgenabschätzung: Theorie und Praxis 3, 49–56 (2004).

    Google Scholar 

  52. Madsen, S. T. The view from Vevey. Econ. Polit. Wkly 36, 3733–3742 (2001).

    Google Scholar 

  53. Assayag, J. in Globalizing India: Perspectives from Below (eds Assayag, J. & Fuller, C. J.) 65–88 (Anthem Press, London, 2005).

    Google Scholar 

  54. Vinayak, R. A. & Bhaskar, G. (eds) Rural Transformation in India: the Impact of Globalisation (New Century Publications, New Delhi, 2005)

    Google Scholar 

  55. Shiva, V., Jafri, A. H., Emani, A. & Pande, M. Seeds of Suicide: The Ecological and Human Costs of Globalization of Agriculture (Research Foundation for Science, Technology and Ecology, Delhi, 2000).

    Google Scholar 

  56. Shiva, V. Resources, rights and regulatory reform. Context 3, 85–91 (2006).

    Google Scholar 

  57. Shiva, V., The Pseudo-Science of Biotech Lobbyists. Irish Seed Saver Association [online], (2006).

    Google Scholar 

  58. Shantharam, S. The Brouhaha about Bt-Cotton in India. AgBioView [online], (2005).

    Google Scholar 

  59. Gopal, N., Qaim, M., Subramanian, A. & Zilberman, D. 2005. Bt cotton controversy. Econ. Polit. Wkly 40, 1514–1517

    Google Scholar 

  60. Rao, C. K. Plant Biotechnology: Causes of Death of Cattle and Sheep in the Telegana Region of Andhra Pradesh in India. Foundation for Biotechnology Awareness and Education [online], (2007).

    Google Scholar 

  61. Herring, R. J. Why did 'Operation Cremate Monsanto' fail? Science and class in India's great terminator technology hoax. Crit. Asian Stud. 38, 467–493 (2006).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  62. Herring R. J. Suicide Seeds? Biotechnology Meets the Developmental State. India in Transition. Center for the Advanced Study of India, University of Pennsylvania [online], (2007).

    Google Scholar 

  63. Weighardt, F. European GMO labeling thresholds impractical and unscientific. Nature Biotechnol. 24, 23–25 (2006).

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  64. Barboza, D. Development of Biotech Crops is Booming in Asia. The New York Times [online], (2003).

    Google Scholar 

  65. Wright, Brian D and Pardey, Philip G . Changing intellectual property regimes: implications for developing country agriculture. Int. J. Technol. Global. 2, 93–144 (2006).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  66. Government of India Ministry of Science and Technology. Biotechnology: A Vision. Department of Biotechnology, New Delhi [online], (2001).

  67. Vandana, S. Biopiracy: The Plunder of Nature and Knowledge (South End, Boston, 1997).

    Google Scholar 

  68. Stone, G. D. Agricultural deskilling and the spread of genetically modified cotton. Curr. Anthropol. 48, 67–103 (2007).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  69. Herring, R. J. in Social Movements in India: Poverty, Power, and Politics (eds Ray, R. & Katzenstein M. F.) (Oxford Univ. Press, 2006).

    Google Scholar 

  70. Lybbert, T. J. Humanitarian use technology transfer: issues and approaches. Int. J. Food, Agric. Environ. 1, 95–99 (2003).

    Google Scholar 

  71. J. I. Cohen, Poor nations turn to publicly developed GM crops. Nature Biotechnol. 23, 27–33 (2005).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  72. Gonsalves, C., Lee, D. R. & Gonsalves, D. The adoption of genetically modified papaya in Hawaii and its implications for developing countries. J. Dev. Stud. 43, 177–191 (2007).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  73. Davidson, S. N. Forbidden fruit: transgenic papaya in Thailand. Plant Physiol. 147, 1–7 (2008).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  74. Lipton, M. Plant breeding and poverty: can transgenic seeds replicate the 'green revolution' as a source of grains for the poor? J. Dev. Stud. 43, 31–62 (2007).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  75. Gold, A. G. Vanishing: seeds' cyclicality. J Mater. Cult. 8, 255–272 (2003).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  76. Ramanjaneyulu, G. V. & Ravindra, A. Terminator Logic: Monsanto, Genetic Engineering and the Future of Agriculture (Science for People/Research Foundation for Science, Technology and Ecology, New Delhi, l999).

  77. ETC Group Communiqué #95. Terminator: The Sequel. ETC Group [online], (2007).

  78. Jayaraman, K. S. Illegal Bt cotton in India haunts regulators. Nature Biotechnol. 19, 1090 (2001).

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  79. Takeda, S. & Matsuoka, M. Genetic approaches to crop improvement: responding to environmental and population changes Nature Rev. Genet. 9, 444–457 (2008).

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  80. Nuffield Council on Bioethics. Genetically Modified Crops: the Ethical and Social Issues. Nuffield Council on Bioethics [online], (1999).

  81. United Nations Development Programme. Human Development Report, 2001: Human Development Report: Making Technologies Work for Human Development (Oxford Univ. Press, New York, 2001). [online], (2001).

  82. James, C. Global Status of Commercialized Biotech/GM Crops: 2007. ISAAA Brief No. 37. (International Service for the Acquisition of Agri-Biotech Applications, Ithaca, New York, 2006).

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

I wish to acknowledge collegial advice from J. Thies, M. Zaitlin and E. Earle.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Related links

Related links

FURTHER INFORMATION

Ron Herring's homepage

AGBIOS

Greenpeace International

Pesticide Action Network International (PAN)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Herring, R. Opposition to transgenic technologies: ideology, interests and collective action frames. Nat Rev Genet 9, 458–463 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1038/nrg2338

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/nrg2338

Further reading

Search

Quick links

Nature Briefing

Sign up for the Nature Briefing newsletter — what matters in science, free to your inbox daily.

Get the most important science stories of the day, free in your inbox. Sign up for Nature Briefing