NOTES AND REFERENCES
- Bureau of Rural Resources . 1989 . Submission to the Senate Select Committee on Agricultural and Veterinary Chemicals , 16 Canberra : Department of Primary Industries and Energy .
- See, for example, L. Orsenigo, The Emergence of Biotechnology, Pinter Publishers, London, UK, 1989; F. A. Rossini, ‘Transitions: The synergistic impacts of major technologies in the twenty-second century and beyond’, Technological Forecasting and Social change, 36, 1989, pp. 217–22.
- The term agrobiotechnology (as well as biotechnology) is also referred to, but in a more general sense as it is often too difficult to separate genetic engineering from the broader context of agrobiotechnology (or biotechnology).
- CSIRO, Submission to the House of Representatives Standing Committee on Industry, Science and Technology Inquiry into Genetically Modified Organisms, Canberra, 1990, p.4.
- F. Buttel, Social Impacts of Biotechnology on Agriculture and Rural America: Neglected Issues and Implications for Agricultural Research and Extension Policy, Cornell Rural Sociology Bulletin Series, Bulletin No.150, Cornell University, New York, 1988.
- Department of Trade, Agribusiness: Structural Developments in Agriculture and the Implications for Australian Trade, Trade Research and Policy Discussion Paper No.4, Department of Trade, 1987.
- Goodman , D. , Sorj , B. and Wilkinson , J. 1987 . From Farming to Biotechnology , Oxford : Basil Blackwell .
- Lawrence , G. 1989 . Genetic engineering and Australian agriculture: Agenda for corporate control . Journal of Australian Political Economy , 25 : 9
- See D. Burch, R. Rickson and R. Annels, ‘Contract farming, social change and environmental impacts’, in K. Walker (ed.), Environmental Policy in Australia, University of New South Wales Press, in press.
- Lawrence, op. cit.
- R. Kalter et al., Biotechnology and the Dairy Industry, Dept. of Agricultural Economics, Cornell University, Ithaca, 1985, cited in G. Lawrence, ‘Structural change in Australian agriculure: The impact of agri-genetics’, paper presented at the Annual Conference of the Sociological Association of Australia and New Zealand, Australian National University, Canberra, November 28-December 2, 1988, p. 16; See also F. Buttel and P. La Ramee, ‘The “Disappearing Middle”: A sociological perspective’, paper presented at the Annual General Meeting of the Rural Sociological Society, Madison, Wisconsin, August 1987.
- For example, it has been the case that Australian scientists inherited the guidelines for biological and physical containment for r-DNA work largely from the USA, particularly in the wake of the International Conference on Recombinant DNA Molecules held at Asilomar, California, on 24-25 February 1975, and then relaxed the guidelines in October 1978 following the relaxation of US guidelines (R. Hindmarsh, K. Hulsman, D. Burch, and A.A. Brownlea, ‘Setting the regulatory agenda on genetic engineering in Australia 1974-1981: A case of scientific control’, Proceedings of the Australian Political Studies Association Conference, Griffith University, 17-19 July 1991).
- See the case involving the transfer of the Genetic Manipulation Advisory Committee from DITAC to the Department of Administration, arranged when the issue of environmental release of GEOs led to potential for political embarrassment. See Anon, ‘GMAC move planned’, Scitech, April, 1988. p. 8.
- There had been earlier attempts in the late 1970s by the University of Melbourne Assembly Report on Genetic Engineering 1979, but there is evidence to assert that this controversy was contained by both scientists and government bureaucrats involved in either developing, regulating and/or sponsoring the technology (Hindmarsh et al., op. cit.).
- F. Howarth, Biotechnology: Revolutionary or Evolutionary? (MScS thesis, NSW University, 1984, pp. 38-42).
- ASTEC, Biotechnology in Australia, Australian Government Publishing Service (AGPS), 1982.
- W.J. McG. Tegart, ‘Biotechnology — a success story for selectivity in Australian science’, paper presented at Symposium on Biotechnology: an Australian Initiative, AGM Symposium of Australian Academy of Science, Canberra, 1 May 1987, p. 17.
- ASTEC, Biotechnology in Australia, (A Supplement), AGPS, Canberra, 1983, p. 2.
- M.J. Playne and B.L. Arnold, Australian & New Zealand Biotechnology Directory, 2nd ed., Australian Biotechnology Association, Australian Industrial Publishers, Adelaide, 1990.
- DITAC, Industry Research and Development Board, Supporting Biotechnology, AGPS, Canberra, 1989.
- DITAC, Biotechnology Consultative Group, Biotechnology in Australia, AGPS, Canberra, 1988, p. 6.
- ibid.
- Industry Research and Development Board, op. cit.
- DPIE, Submission to the House of Representatives Standing Committee on Industry, Science and Technology Inquiry into Genetically Modified Organisms, Canberra, 1990, Attachment 5.
- CSIRO, op. cit., p. 7
- Biotechnology Consultative Group, op. cit., p. 39.
- CSIRO, op. cit., p. 10.
- In the August 1988 budget funds to the CSIRO were cut in real terms by almost nine per cent which was on top of a 23 per cent overall reduction of funds in the last four budgets, The Australian, 14 August 1988, p. 11 and Law Reform Commission of Victoria, Genetic Manipulation, Discussion Paper No.11, 1988, cited in Lawrence, op. cit., 1988, p. 25.
- See Lawrence, ibid.
- Lawrence, op. cit., 1989, p. 9.
- For example, the recent World Bank-INSAR-AIDAB-ACIAR's study on Agricultural biotechnology: Opportunities for international development’ presented at a symposium in Canberra, Australia, May 1989. A report of the symposium was recently published as G.J. Persley (ed.), Biotechnology in Agriculture, CAB International, Oxon., UK, 1989.
- Playne and Arnold, op. cit., p. 11.
- DITAC, Submission to the House of Representatives Standing Committee on Industry, Science and Technology Inquiry into Genetically Modified Organisms, Canberra, 1990.
- Biotechnology Consultative Group, op. cit., p. 5.
- ASTEC, op. cit., 1982.
- Playne and Arnold, op. cit.
- One estimate by Pat Mooney is that $US12 billion was spent in the 1980s on agricultural biotechnology (P. Mooney, ‘An informal address by Pat Mooney’, Beyond Biocides: People Linking for a Sustainable Future, Third PAN International Meeting, 25-28 January, 1989, Penang, Malaysia, p. 20.)
- D. Scott-Kemmis, T. Darling and P. Stark, ‘Strategic alliances in the Australian biotechnology industry’, Australian Journal of Biotechnology, 2, 2, 1989, pp. 122–6.
- DPIE, Submission to the House of Representatives Standing Committee on Industry, Science and Technology Inquiry into Genetically Modified Organisms, op. cit., p. 27.
- G. O'Neill, ‘Genetic shears cut their way to market’, New Scientist, 21 July 1989, p. 17.
- See, for example, M. Kamenetzky and R.H. Maybury, Agriculture in harmony with nature’, Science and Public Policy, 16, 2, 1989, pp. 73-82; J. Reganold, ‘Farming's organic future’, New Scientist, 10 June 1989, pp 31-4; the agenda of the National Association for Sustainable Agriculture of Australia (NASAA). All these approaches to sustainable agriculture avoid or largely exclude the use of synthetically compounded fertilisers, pesticides and growth regulators.
- Adapted from C. Hassebrook and G. Hegyes, Choices for the Heartland: Alternative Directions in Biotechnology and Implications for Family Planning, Rural Communities and the Environment, Centre for Rural Affairs, Walthil, NE, 1989, cited in New Zealand Department of Scientific and Industrial Research, Genetic Engineering: A Perspective on Current Issues, DSIR Crop Research Report No.137, 1990, p. 38.
- J. Rissler and M. Mellon, National Wildlife Federation Comments to the USDA APHIS on Two Applications from Calgene, Inc. to Field Test Cotton Plants Genetically Engineered to Tolerate the Herbicide Bromoxynil or Resist Insects and Tolerate Bromoxynil, National Biotechnology Policy Center, National Wildlife Federation, Washington, D.C., 1991, p. 8.
- B.R. Lyons, D.J. Llewellyn, E.S. Huppatz, E.S. Dennis and W.J. Peacock, ‘Expression of a bacterial gene in transgenic tobacco plants confers resistance to the herbicide 2,4-dichlorophenoxyacetic acid’, Plant Molecular Biology, 13, 1989, pp. 533–40.
- D. Llewllyn and M. Sleigh, in litt., 28 June 1991. They also challenge interpretations of chemical toxicity tests on animals that claim 2,4-D is a cause of carcinogenity, mutagenicity, male reproductive hazards and kidney and liver damage. They assert the standard for such tests has come under increasing scepticism even from their originator Bruce Ames (B. Ames, ‘Chemical carcinogenesis’, Proceedings of the National Academy of Science, 87, 1990, pp. 7772-6). Yet, the CSIRO claims seem rather overstated as Ames’ work appears to contain no clear conclusions about the toxicity effects of 2,4-D. Indeed, what Ames’ work does is to emphasise the clear need for more evaluation with appropriate experimental design. A number of environmental scientists (personal communication) also argue that testing of 2,4-D does not adequately account for ecological factors. Many advocates of 2,4-D project it as environmentally benign because of its claimed rapid breakdown in soils. Yet, this generalisation does not account for a range of ecological factors affecting its biodegradability such as appropriate and sufficient microbial populations in any particular soil type, actual soil type, soil texture, soil moisture content and temperature.
- D. Pimentel, ‘Down on the farm: Genetic engineering meets ecology’, Technology Review, 90, 1, 1987, pp. 24–31.
- In R. Ritchie (ed.), Australian Geography: Current Issues, McGraw-Hill, Australia, 1990, p. 13.
- Gylnn et al., ‘The occurrence and toxicity of herbicides in reef building corals’, Marine Pollution Bulletin, 15, 1984, p. 370.
- G. P. Georghiou, ‘Implications of potential resistance to biopesticides’, in D.W. Roberts and R.P. Granados (eds), Proceedings of a Conference, 18-20 July 1988, Boyce Thompson Institute for Plant Research, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY, 1989, p. 20; Bureau of Rural Resources, op. cit., p. 13.
- CSIRO, op. cit., p. 46.
- G. Ruivenkamp, The Introduction of Biotechnology into the Agroindustrial Chain of Production Ph.D. thesis, University of Amsterdam, 1989, p. 97).
- Lyons et al., op. cit.
- Llewllyn, pers. comm., July 1991.
- New Zealand Department of Scientific and Industrial Research, op. cit., p. 38.
- Cited in New Zealand Department of Scientific and Industrial Research, ibid.
- J. Rissler, ‘Biotechnology promise betrayed’, Chemistry and Industry, 6 August 1990, p. 500.
- H.M. LeBaron, ‘Herbicide resistance in plants’, in J.F. MacDonald (ed.), Biotechnology and Sustainable Agriculture: Policy Alternatives, National Agricultural Biotechnology Council (NABC) Report No. 1, Ithaca, New York, 1989, p. 92.
- F. Chaboussou, ‘How pesticides increase pests’, The Ecologist, 16, 1, 1986, pp. 29–35.
- R. Goldburg, J. Rissler, H. Shand and C. Hassebrooke, Biotechnology's Bitter Harvest, A Report of the Biotechnology Working Group, USA, 1990, p. 8.
- R. J. Goldburg, ‘Should the development of herbicide tolerant plants be a focus of sustainable agriculture research?’, in MacDonald (ed.), op. cit., p.106.
- Goldburg et al., op. cit., p. 8.
- For instance, the US EPA has not been able to determine the carcinogenic potential of glyphosate, the active ingredient of Roundup, from the available scientific data. Furthermore, toxicological tests concentrate on death, carcinogenicity, mutagenicity and oncogenicity. There is no requirement for tests on immune system suppression, behavioural changes, nervous system damage, or skin disorders. All these effects have been reported as possible results of Roundup poisoning (Pesticide Monitor, 2, 1991, p. 8).
- Goldburg, op. cit., p. 105.
- LeBaron, op. cit., pp. 95–6.
- G. Comstock, ‘Is genetically engineered herbicide-resistance (GEHR) compatible with low-input sustainable agriculture (LISA)?’, in J.F. MacDonald (ed.), op. cit.
- Goldburg et al., op. cit., p. 8.
- See J.M. Teidje et. al., ‘The planned introduction of genetically engineered organisms: ecological consideration and recommendation’, Ecology, 70, 1989, pp. 298-315; and N.C. Ellstrand and C.A. Hoffman, ‘Hybridization as an avenue of escape for engineered genes’, Bioscience, 40, 6, 1990, pp. 438–42.
- Data of this expanding R&D trend is drawn from: Rural Advancement Fund International (RAFI), RAFI Communique Newesletters, USA, 1987; Goldburg et al., op. cit.; and M.L. Sans, ‘Genetics control will strengthen big firms’, Business Times, February 23, 1988.
- Georghiou, op. cit., p. 18.
- D. Pimentel, ‘Biopesticides and the environment’, in MacDonald, op. cit., p. 69.
- D. Boulter, ‘Genetic engineering of plants for insect resistance’, Outlook on Agriculture, 18, 1, 1989, pp. 2–6.
- Georghiou, op. cit., p. 21; and B.E. Tabashnik, N.L. Cushing, N. Finson and M.W. Johnson, ‘Field development of resistance to Bacillus thuringiensis in diamondback moth (Lepidoptera Plutellellidae)’, Journal of Economic Entomology, 83, 1990, pp. 1671-6, cited in Rissler and Mellon, op. cit.
- N. Myers, The Sinking Ark, Pergamon Press, 1979, p. 61.
- CSIRO, op. cit., p. 44.
- ibid.
- Georghiou, op. cit., p. 20.
- New Zealand Department of Scientific and Industrial Research, op. cit., p. 58.
- ibid., p. 47.
- Pimentel, op. cit., pp. 72–73.
- D. Pimentel, et al., ‘Environmental risks of biological pest controls’, OIKOS, 42, 1984, pp. 283-90; F. P. Miller, cited in B. Hileman, ‘Alternative agriculture’, Chemical and Engineering News, March 5 1990, pp. 26–40.
- See J. Doyle, ‘Potential food safety problems related to new uses of biotechnology’, Biotechnology and the Food Supply; Proceedings of a Symposium, National Academy Press, Washington, DC, 1988.
- Anon, ‘Ecogen licenses genes to Pioneer Hi-Bred’, Chemical and Engineering News, April 22, 1991, p. 13.
- See, for example, E. von Weizsacker, ‘The environment dimensions of biotechnology’, in D. Danes (ed.), Industrial Biotechnology in Europe, Frances Pinter, London, 1986; and B.D. Davis, ‘Bacterial domestification: underlying assumptions, Science, 253, 1987, pp. 1329–35.
- P. Wheale and R. McNally, Genetic Engineering: Catastrophe or Utopia?, Harvester, England, 1988.
- D. Burch, K. Hulsman, R. Hindmarsh and A. Brownlea, Biotechnology Policy and Industry Regulation: Some Ecological, Social and Legal Considerations, Submission to the House of Representatives Standing Committee on Industry, Science and Technology Inquiry into Genetically Modified Organisms, 1990, p. 24.
- DITAC, Biotechnology Consultative Group, op. cit., p. 14.
- O. Bergh, K.Y. Borsheim, G. Bratbak and M. Heldal, ‘High abundance of viruses found in aquatic environments’, Nature, 340, 10 August 1989. pp. 467–8.
- C.S. Levings III, ‘The Texas cytoplasm of maize: Cytoplasmic male sterility and disease susceptibility’, Science, 16 November 1990, pp. 942–7.
- B. M. Pollock, ‘Cytoplasmic male sterility in corn: A problem for the U.S. science community and public’, unpublished paper, Science Mediation Service, Boulder, Colorado, nd.
- Royal Commission on Environmental Pollution, 13th Report, The Release of Genetically Engineered Organisms to the Environment, HMSO, London, July 1989.
- K. Hulsman, ‘Some issues arising from the roundtable discussion 19 April 1991’, House of Representatives Standing Committee on Industry, Science and Technology Inquiry into Genetically Modified Organisms, Australia, 1991.
- ibid.
- Royal Commission on Environmental Pollution, op. cit. p. 17.
- ibid.
- Hulsman, op. cit.; see also D. Simberloff, ‘Releasing genetically engineered organisms: Introduced species as a ‘model”, a seminar held in the Zoology Dept., University of Melbourne, 15 August 1990.
- ibid.
- Hulsman, ibid. Because of this blurred distinction between a novel organism and an exotic organism in the way they respönd to the environment, we are applying the model of the impact of exotic organisms to predict the impact of novel organisms.
- D. S. Simberloff, ‘Community effects of introduced species’, in M.H. Nitecki (ed.), Biotic Crisis in Ecological and Evolutionary Time, Academic Press, New York, 1981.
- M.H. Williamson and K.C. Brown, ‘The analysis and modelling of British invasions’, Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society, Series B, 314, 1986, pp. 506–22.
- Pimentel, op. cit., p. 73.
- United Nations Conference on Environment and Development (UNCED), Biotechnology Background Part 1, pc/67, 1991, Report of the Secretary General of the UNCED Conference, para. 21.
- See M. K. Hansen, ‘Biotechnology and milk: benefit or threat?’ geneWATCH, 7, 1-2, 1991, pp. 1–2.
- Rissler and Mellon, op. cit., p. 1.
- J. Hodgson, ‘Growing plants and growing companies’, Bio/Technology, 8, 1990, pp. 624-8; Anon, New Scientist, 10 February 1990, p. 9.
- SAGB, ‘Community Policy for Biotechnology: Priorities and Actions’, SAGB, Brussels, 1990.
- H. Hobbelink, R. Velle and M. Abraham, Inside the Biorevolution, IOCU and GRAIN, 1990.
- J. Doyle, Altered Harvest, Viking Penguin, 1985.
- D. J. Padwa, ‘Genetic engineering: A new tool for plant breeders’, in Genetic Engineering and Plant Breeding UPOV, Geneva, 1983, cited in J. R. Kloppenburg, First the Seed, Cambridge University Press, 1988, p. 16.
- Lawrence, op. cit., 1988, p. 26.
- ibid.
- See S. O'Keefe, A Critical Review of Plant Patenting Legislation and the Australian Plant Rights Bill (Honours dissertation, School of Australian Environmental Studies, Griffith University, 1981).
- P. R. Mooney, Seeds of the Earth: A Private or Public Resource?, Revised ed., Inter Pares, Ottawa, 1979.
- Doyle, op. cit., p. 311.
- O'Keefe, op. cit.
- Anon, ‘Hodder and Tolley open Sydney H.Q.’, Australian Seed Industry Magazine, 6, 1, 1988, p. 14.
- M. R. Nugent, ‘Agribusiness investment: realising the opportunities’, paper presented to National Outlook Conference, 1988, Canberra.
- P. Osborne, ‘Biotech nursery blossoms’, Financial Review, August 14 1987.
- Anon, Genetic Technology News, June 1990, p. 9.
- Anon, “A Change for Hannaford’, Australian Seed Industry Magazine, 5, 4, 1987, pp. 26-7. ‘Alternative pesticides spawned by biotechnology could grow to $8 billion market by 2000’, Biotechnology Bulletin, 8, 5, June 1989, cited in Genetic Engineering and Biotechnology Monitor, UNIDO, 27 February 1990.
- Alternative pesticides spawned by biotechnology could grow to $8 billion market by 2000’, Biotechnology Bulletin, 8, 5, June 1989, cited in Genetic Engineering and Biotechnology Monitor, UNIDO, 27 February 1990.
- C. Fowler, E. Lachkovics, P. Mooney and H. Shand, Development Dialogue, 1-2, 1988, p. 4.
- Goldburg, op. cit., p. 104.
- RAFI, op. cit.
- M-J. Pate, ‘Researchers prepare super seeds of 1990s’, Agribusiness Worldwide, 4, 10, 1989, pp. 6–12.
- G. Ruivenkamp, ‘Social impacts of biotechnology on agriculture and food processing’, Development, 4, 1987, pp. 58–9.
- Mooney, op. cit., 1989, p. 21; USDA, ‘Applications to USDA under Federal Plant Pest act to field test genetically engineered plants (1987-1991)’, cited in The Gene Exchange, 2, 1, 1991, pp. 9–23.
- In other words, they represent major foreign players in the field of 59 companies producing and/or marketing agrochemicals in Australia. In this field some 20 are foreign transnationals. Indeed, “seventeen of the world's top twenty [agribusiness] corporations and all but one of the top ten, have operations in the Australian agrochemicals supply industry” (S. Sargeant, The Foodmakers, Penguin, 1985, pp. 87-88), an $850 million market in 1988 (up from $200-275 million in 1980). (ASTEC, Health, Politics, Trade: Controlling Chemical Residues in Agricultural Products, A Report to the Prime Minister, AGPS, Canberra, March 1989, p. ix). Figures from the Australian Bureau of Statistics confirm the foreign domination of the local market. Sectors relevant to agrobiotechnology and the restructuring of agriculture include pesticides (91.8 per cent foreign controlled), petroleum refining (81.2 per cent), basic chemicals (78.8 per cent), and pharmaceutical and veterinary (74.5 per cent) (ABS, Foreign Ownership and Control of the Manufacturing Industry, Australia 1982-83, Canberra, 1985, Table 5. The figures refer to value added attributable to foreign owned and/or controlled as a per cent).
- For example, Lawrence, op. cit., 1989.
- D. S. Jessop, Industrial Research and Development in Australia, Report of the Senate Standing Committee on Science and the Environment, Canberra, 1979, p. 231.
- C. Vinall, ‘Protecting an innovation’, paper presented at Commercialisation of Agricultural Technology Seminar, Adelaide, 6 May 1988; cited in Lawrence, op. cit., 1988.
- B. W. Holloway, Submission to the DITAC Biotechnology Consultative Group from the Biotechnology Advisory Committee of the Industry Research and Development Board, Canberra, 1988.
- D. Harrison, ‘Strategic alliances for Australian biotechnology companies’, Proceedings of Commercial and Regulatory Aspects of Biotechnology — An International Perspective, August 30-31, 1988.
- Ecologically Sustainable Development Working Groups, Draft Report — Agriculture, AGPS, Canberra, August 1991.