Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Agricultural Biotechnology Issues

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
US Programs Affecting Food and Agricultural Marketing

Part of the book series: Natural Resource Management and Policy ((NRMP,volume 38))

  • 1412 Accesses

Abstract

With the advent of biotechnology in agriculture, the science of crop improvement has evolved into a new realm. The results have been greater productivity with less environmental risk from chemical use. In the future, there are greater possibilities in both plants and animals. However, these advances in science and technology along with other factors are placing many new demands on policies and programs designed in an earlier era. Advances in agricultural biotechnology have clearly outstripped changes in policies and programs and as a result threaten the promise that the technology has to offer. This chapter evaluates issues, policies, and options affecting the use of agricultural biotechnology that include (1) the role of the technology in minor crops, (2) the reality of adventitious or low level presence of biotech crops, (3) the structure for regulation of the technology, and (4) the impact of the technology on seed industry concentration.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 129.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    The five workshops were (1) seed technology, vertical integration, market transparency, and buyer power, March 12, (2) poultry industry, May 21, (3) dairy industry, June 25, (4) livestock industry, August 27 and (5) margins, December 8.

  2. 2.

    APHIS released a statement in 2007 on how it would respond to low-levels of regulated GE plant materials which may occur in commercial seeds or grain. In 2007, APHIS also initiated a process to amend its biotechnology regulations under 7CFR part 340. As a part of that process, APHIS stated that it will consider establishing new criteria to determine whether low levels of regulated materials would be acceptable in commercial seeds and grain based on risks to plant health, public health and the environment. In 2012, the amendments to the biotechnology regulations have not been published.

References

  • Alston, J.M. 2004. “Horticultural biotechnology faces significant economic and market barriers.” California Agriculture 58(2): 80-88.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bradford, K.J. and J.M. Alston, 2004. “Diversity of horticultural biotech crops contributes to market hurdles.” California Agriculture 58(2): 84-85.

    Google Scholar 

  • Borlaug, N. 2000. “Ending world hunger: The promise of biotechnology and the tHReat of antiscience zealotry.” Plant Physiology 124: 487-490.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Conway G and G. Toenniessen. 2003. “Science for African food security.” Science 299(5610): 1187-1188.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Duke, S.O. and S.B. Powles. 2008. “Glyphosate-resistant weeds and crops, Editorial Material.” Pest Management Science 64(4): 317-318.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • ETC Group. September/October 2005. Global Seed Industry Concentration–2005. ETC Group Communique.

    Google Scholar 

  • ETC Group. May/June 2008. Patenting the “Climate Genes” and “Capturing the Climate Agenda.” Communique #99.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fernandez-Cornejo,J. and William D. McBride. 2002. “Adoption of Bioengineered Crops.” Agricultural Economic Report No. 810. Economic Research Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fuchs,M., and D. Gonsalves. 2008. “Safety of virus-resistant transgenic plants two decades after their introduction: Lessons from realistic field risk assessment studies.” Annual Review of Phytopathology 45:173-202.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gottlieb, S. and M.B. Wheeler. 2009. Genetically Engineered Animals and Public Health. Washington D.C.: Biotechnology Industry Organization.

    Google Scholar 

  • International Service for the Acquisition of Agri-biotech Applications (ISAAA). 2011. Executive Summary: Global Status of Commercialized Biotech/GM Crops. ISAAA Brief 43-2011.

    Google Scholar 

  • Johnson, R. 2008. Organic Agriculture in the United States: Program and policy issues. Washington, DC: Congressional Research Service RL31595, Resources, Science and Industry Division.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kalaitzandonakes, N., J.M. Alston, and K.J. Bradford. 2007. “Compliance costs for regulatory approval of new biotech crops.” Nature Biotechnology 25(5):509-511.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • National Research Council. 2002. Environmental Effects of Transgenic Plants: The Scope and Adequacy of Regulation. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • National Research Council. 2004. Biological Confinement of Genetically Engineered Organisms Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • National Research Council. 2010. The Impact of Genetically Engineered Crops on Farm Sustainability in the United States. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • National Organic Program. 2000. NOP Regulation. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Agricultural Marketing Service, Federal Register 65, No. 246, p.80556.

    Google Scholar 

  • Office of Science and Technology Policy (1986) Coordinated Framework for Regulation of Biotechnology: Federal Register 51: 23302 Washington, D.C.: Executive Office of the President, June 26.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ollinger, M., and J. Fernandez-Cornejo. 1995. Regulation, innovation, and market structure in the U.S. pesticide industry. Washington, D.C.: USDA, Economic Research Service AER 719.

    Google Scholar 

  • Phillips McDougall. July 2005. “Seed Industry Consolidation,” Unpublished report cited in Compilation of Submissions on Potential Socioeconomic Impacts of Genetic Use Restriction Technologies (GURTs) on Indigenous and Local Communities. United Nations Environmental Program, Convention on Biological Diversity, December 14, 2005.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pinstrup-Andersen, P., M.J. Cohen. 2000. “Modern Biotechnology for Food and Agriculture: Risks and Opportunities for the Poor.” Agricultural biotechnology and the poor. G.J. Persley and M.M. Lantin (eds). Washington DC.: The World Bank.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pullen Seeds, 2006. Pullen Seeds and Soil v. Monsanto Company. U.S. District Court in Wilmington, DE: No. 06-599.

    Google Scholar 

  • Serageldin, I. 1999. “Biotechnology and Food Security in the 21st Century.” Science 285: 387-389.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • USDA, ERS. 2009. Agricultural Biotechnology: Adoption of biotechnology and its production impacts. Washington, D.C.: Economic Research Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture.

    Google Scholar 

  • USDA, NASS. 2011. Acreage Report. Washington, D.C.: National Agricultural Statistics Service Cr Pr 2-5 (6-11). U.S. Department of Agriculture.

    Google Scholar 

  • Verhoog, H., M. Matze, E.L. van Buren, and T. Baars. 2003. “The role of the concept of the natural (naturalness) in organic farming.” Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 16(1):22-49.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vos, T. 2000. “Visions of the middle landscape: Organic farming and the politics of nature.” Agriculture and Human Values 17(3): 245-256.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Biotechnology Industry Organization, 7509 Walton Lane, Annandale, VA, 22003, USA

    Michael J. Phillips

Authors
  1. Michael J. Phillips
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Michael J. Phillips .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Farm Foundation, Darien Club Drive 1709, Darien, 60561, Connecticut, USA

    Walter J. Armbruster

  2. Texas A&M University, Rose Circle 1011, College Station, 77840, Texas, USA

    Ronald D. Knutson

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2013 Springer Science+Business Media New York

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Phillips, M.J. (2013). Agricultural Biotechnology Issues. In: Armbruster, W., Knutson, R. (eds) US Programs Affecting Food and Agricultural Marketing. Natural Resource Management and Policy, vol 38. Springer, New York, NY. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4614-4930-0_17

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4614-4930-0_17

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, New York, NY

  • Print ISBN: 978-1-4614-4929-4

  • Online ISBN: 978-1-4614-4930-0

  • eBook Packages: Business and EconomicsEconomics and Finance (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation