LECTURELECTUREGEOG 270GEOG 270

Fall 2007Fall 2007

December 3, 2007December 3, 2007

Joe Hannah, PhDJoe Hannah, PhDDepartment of GeographyDepartment of GeographyUniversity of WashingtonUniversity of Washington

GMO Recap and Wrap-upGMO Recap and Wrap-up

Last TimeLast Time►Food Security (“chameleon word” – Food Security (“chameleon word” –

saturated with politics!)saturated with politics!)►Debate: GMOs and hunger Debate: GMOs and hunger (“Naming and (“Naming and

Framing”)Framing”)►Case study from Zerbe article: Case study from Zerbe article:

southern Africa food crisis (2002), southern Africa food crisis (2002), American food Aid, and local policy American food Aid, and local policy responsesresponses

GMO topic Recap/Wrap-upGMO topic Recap/Wrap-up

►““Green Revolution”Green Revolution”►““Gene Revolution” (GMO crops)Gene Revolution” (GMO crops)

Green RevolutionGreen Revolution►Malthusian Premise: Malthusian Premise: While we work on While we work on

reducing fertility, we can also reducing fertility, we can also increaseincrease food productionfood production

►Remember the context of the 1960s:Remember the context of the 1960s: Erhlich’s Erhlich’s Population BombPopulation Bomb ““Modernization” and the promise of Modernization” and the promise of

technologytechnology►Scientific, plant-breeding approach -- Scientific, plant-breeding approach --

HYVsHYVs

HYV CharacteristicsHYV Characteristics► large-yield, large-yield, ► dwarf stock, dwarf stock, ► disease and pest disease and pest

resistant resistant (among other (among other things)things)

► Hybrid crops – can’t Hybrid crops – can’t collect seedscollect seeds

Top-downTop-down► Started by Governments and Foundations Started by Governments and Foundations

(like Rockefeller), (like Rockefeller), Not “requested” by Third World farmersNot “requested” by Third World farmers

► Later largely financed by WB, UN (FAO, Later largely financed by WB, UN (FAO, UNDP, UNEP)UNDP, UNEP)

► Set up plant breading and other research Set up plant breading and other research projectsprojects

Essentially a Keynesian approach to development.

Critiques of the Green Critiques of the Green RevolutionRevolution

► Increased use of Increased use of chemicals, water, chemicals, water, mechanizationmechanization

► Water pollution, other Water pollution, other environmental environmental problemsproblems

► Monocultures, Monocultures, decreased biodiversitydecreased biodiversity► Economics favored rich farmersEconomics favored rich farmers

► Technologies encouraged increased debt Technologies encouraged increased debt and consequent land consolidationand consequent land consolidation

► Broke down social relations in communities, Broke down social relations in communities, increased conflictincreased conflict

““Gene Revolution” Gene Revolution” ► Combining genes from one species Combining genes from one species

with another to create specific traitswith another to create specific traits► Undertaken by private companiesUndertaken by private companies► Originally (and fundamentally) a Originally (and fundamentally) a

technology developed for profittechnology developed for profit► Malthusian and humanitarian Malthusian and humanitarian

arguments as wellarguments as well

Essentially a Neo-liberal approach to development.

I. GMO Basic Science:I. GMO Basic Science:e.g., e.g., Bacillus thuringiensis (Bt)

http://www.biotech.iastate.edu/biotech_info_series/bio9.html

http://www.scq.ubc.ca/?p=262

http://www.ent.iastate.edu/imagegal/plantpath/corn/ecb/bteardam.html

GMO Basic Science:GMO Basic Science:e.g., “Roundup Ready”e.g., “Roundup Ready”

II. “Naming and Framing” in the II. “Naming and Framing” in the GMO DebateGMO Debate

► Food Security / Feeding the WorldFood Security / Feeding the World► Increased yields – fact or fiction?Increased yields – fact or fiction?► Environmental riskEnvironmental risk►Capitalism & Farm IncomesCapitalism & Farm Incomes

e.g., McGloughlin vs. Altieri & Rossett

III. Resistance and Social Movements:III. Resistance and Social Movements:Kacy McKinney’s talk onKacy McKinney’s talk on

MST, Land and GMOs in BrazilMST, Land and GMOs in Brazil► Interesting case of Interesting case of

stakeholder responsestakeholder response► ““Landless Peasants”Landless Peasants”

““Land should be used Land should be used to fulfill its larger to fulfill its larger social functions.”social functions.”

GMOs: A threat? A rallying GMOs: A threat? A rallying point?point?

► Against legalization of Against legalization of GMOs GMOs (successful until 2004)(successful until 2004)

► Lobby, demonstrate, Lobby, demonstrate, raise awarenessraise awareness

► Exposed illegal plantingsExposed illegal plantings

► GMOs promoted by MNCs: GMOs promoted by MNCs: “Privatization of “Privatization of development?”development?”

► Roles of state, corporations, Roles of state, corporations, social movements: social movements: Peaceful? Violent?Peaceful? Violent?

IV. Three Criteria for GMO IV. Three Criteria for GMO BusinessBusiness

ProfitabilityScien

ce

Law

GMOs

Essentially a Neo-liberal approach to development.

Three CriteriaThree Criteria►Science (expensive, risky investments, Science (expensive, risky investments,

located in the First-World)located in the First-World)►Profits (Profits (corporations:corporations: recoup recoup

investments, expand markets)investments, expand markets)►LawLaw

IPRIPR ““Free trade”Free trade” ““Permissive” environmentPermissive” environment

V. Policy Responses in Third V. Policy Responses in Third World CountriesWorld Countries

►Countries must respond to pressures to Countries must respond to pressures to adopt GMOsadopt GMOs

►Policy responses are complex – Policy responses are complex – corporate lobbying, trade policy, corporate lobbying, trade policy, bilateral relations, responses of diverse bilateral relations, responses of diverse interests within the countryinterests within the country

►Neo-liberal/Keynesian? Neo-liberal/Keynesian? Precautionary/Permissive? Precautionary/Permissive? (e.g. US vs. (e.g. US vs. Europe)Europe)

““Permissive” Permissive” vs.vs. “Precautionary” Approaches“Precautionary” Approaches

►““Permissive Approach” favors allowing Permissive Approach” favors allowing an activity to continue until proof of an activity to continue until proof of either no effect or a negative impact is either no effect or a negative impact is obtained. obtained.

► “ “Precautionary” approach favors Precautionary” approach favors constraining an activity when there is constraining an activity when there is high scientific high scientific uncertaintyuncertainty regarding its regarding its effects on the natural environment;effects on the natural environment;

VI. Food Security and Food VI. Food Security and Food AidAid

►What is Food Security?What is Food Security?►GMOs and Food Security debate:GMOs and Food Security debate:

““Food gap” & “Productivity gap” Food gap” & “Productivity gap” vs.vs. Need soc-political change, not Need soc-political change, not

commercialized technologycommercialized technology►Case study of Southern Africa food Case study of Southern Africa food

crisis: different countries, different crisis: different countries, different GMO policy responsesGMO policy responses

The GMO Issue: The GMO Issue: UnresolvedUnresolved►What should be done?What should be done?►Should Third World countries be Should Third World countries be

encouraged to adopt? (increased yields, encouraged to adopt? (increased yields, less chemicals, etc.)less chemicals, etc.)

►Or should they resist? (unknown effects, Or should they resist? (unknown effects, genetic pollution, food safety, etc.)genetic pollution, food safety, etc.)

►What about US domestic policy? (labeling, What about US domestic policy? (labeling, subsidies to farmers, food aid, etc.)subsidies to farmers, food aid, etc.)

The Global Food SystemThe Global Food System►Shiva: Global food supply has been Shiva: Global food supply has been

“hijacked” by corporate interests:“hijacked” by corporate interests:►Neo-liberal approach to food distribution Neo-liberal approach to food distribution

(exemplified by GMOs and “privatized (exemplified by GMOs and “privatized development”)development”) makes the marginalized makes the marginalized more vulnerable, leads to more hunger more vulnerable, leads to more hunger and more violenceand more violence

►Should food be a Should food be a commoditycommodity or a or a rightright??