Geographies of Risk and Difference in Crop Genetic Engineering

References

• Ackerman, F., T. A. Wise, K. P. Gallagher, L. Ney, and R. Flores. 2003. Free Trade, Corn, and the Environment: Environmental Impacts of US‐Mexico Corn Trade under NAFTA. Global Development and Environment Institute Working Paper No. 03–06. Medford, Mass.: Tufts University. [http:ase.tufts.edugdaePubswp03‐06‐NAFTACorn.pdf].
   Google Scholar
• Africa Group. 2003. Taking Forward the Negotiation of Article 27.3B of the TRIPs Agreement. Communication from the Africa Group to the WTO TRIPS Council.
   Google Scholar
• Altieri, M. 1995. Agroecology: The Science of Sustainable Agriculture. Boulder, Colo: Westview Press.
   Google Scholar
• Apffel‐marglin, F., and S. Marglin. 1996. Decolonizing Knowledge: From Development to Dialogue. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
   Google Scholar
• Barboza, D. 2001. As Biotech Crops Multiply, Consumers Get Little Choice. New York Times (Late Edition, Final), 9 June, §1, 1.
   Google Scholar
• Barton, J. 1998. The Impact of Contemporary Patent Law on Plant Biotechnology Research. In Intellectual Property Rights III: Global Genetic Resources; Access and Property Rights, edited by S. A. Eberhart, 85–97. Madison, Wis.: Crop Science Society of America.
   Google Scholar
• Barton, J., and P. Berger. 2001. Patenting Agriculture. Issues in Science and Technology 7 (4): 43–50.
   Google Scholar
• Batterbury, S. P. J., and A. J. Bebbington. 1999. Environmental Histories, Access to Resources, and Landscape Change: An Introduction. Land Degradation and Development 10 (4): 279–283.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bebbington, A., and J. Carney. 1990. Geography in the International Agricultural Research Centers: Theoretical and Practical Concerns. Annals of the Association of American Geographers 80 (1): 34–48.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Becker, E. 2003. U.S. Threatens to Act against Europeans over Modified Foods. New York Times (Late Edition, Final), 10 January, §A, 4.
   Google Scholar
• Benbrook, C. M. 1999. Evidence of the Magnitude and Consequences of the Roundup Ready Soybean Yield Drag from University‐Based Varietal Trials in 1998. Ag Bio Tech InfoNet, Technical Paper No. 1. [http:www.biotech‐info.netRR_yield_drag_98.pdf].
   Google Scholar
• Benbrook, C. M. 2001. Do GM Crops Mean Less Pesticide Use Pesticide Outlook [now Outlooks on Pest Management], October, 204–207.
   Google Scholar
• Benbrook, C. M. 2003a. GMOs, Pesticide Use, and Alternatives: Lessons from the U.S. Experience. Paper presented at the Conference on GMOS and Agriculture, Paris, 20 June. [http:www.biotech‐info.netlessons_learned.pdf].
   Google Scholar
• Benbrook, C. M. 2003b. Principles Governing the Long‐Run Risks, Benefits, and Costs of Agricultural Biotechnology. Paper presented at the Conference on Biodiversity, Biotechnology, and the Protection of Traditional Knowledge, St. Louis, Mo., April 5. [http:www.biotech‐info.netbiod_biotech.pdf].
   Google Scholar
• Blaikie, P., and H. Brookfield. 1987. Land Degradation and Society. London: Methuen.
   Google Scholar
• Boyd, W. 2003. Wonderful Potencies? Deep Structure and the Problem of Monopoly in Agricultural Biotechnology. In Engineering Trouble: Biotechnology and Its Discontents, edited by R. A. Schurman and D. D. T. Kelso, 24–62. Berkeley: University of California Press.
   Google Scholar
• Brookfield, H. C. 2001. Exploring Agrodiversity. New York: Columbia University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Carlsen, L. 2001. Little, Yellow Different Latin Trade, August.
   Google Scholar
• Carpenter, J. E. 2001. Comparing Roundup Ready and Conventional Soybean Yields. Washington, D.C.: National Center for Food and Agricultural Policy.
   Google Scholar
• CEC [North American Commission on Environmental Cooperation]. 2004. Maize and Biodiversity: The Effects of Transgenic Maize in Mexico: Key Findings and Recommendations. [http:www.cec.orgmaize].
   Google Scholar
• CIMMYT [Centro Internacional Mejoramiento de Maíz y Trigo]. 2001. Response to Discovery of Transgenic Maize Growing in Mexico. Mexico City: CIMMYT, [http:www.cimmyt.orgenglishwpstransgtransgenic.htm].
   Google Scholar
• Cohen, J. I., ed. 1999. Managing Agricultural Biotechnology: Addressing Research Program Needs and Policy Implications. Biotechnology in Agriculture Series, 23 Wallingford, England: CABI Publishing.
   Google Scholar
• Conway, G. 1997. The Doubly Green Revolution: Food for All in the Twenty‐First Century. Ithaca, N.Y.: Comstock Cornell University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Drahos, P. 1999. The TRIPs Review. Paper presented at the Conference on Strengthening Africa's Participation in the Review and Revision of the TRIPs Agreement of the World Trade Organization, February. Nairobi: African Centre for Technology Studies.
   Google Scholar
• Drahos, P. 2003. Expanding Intellectual Property's Empire: The Role of FTAs. Australian National University, Research School of Social Sciences, Regulatory Institutions Network. [http:www.grain.orgrights_filesdrahos‐fta‐2003‐en.pdf].
   Google Scholar
• Ellstrand, N. C. 2001. When Transgenes Wander, Should We Worry Plant Physiology 125 (4): 1543.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Elmore, R. W., F. W. Roeth, L. A. Nelson, C. A. Shapiro, R. N. Klein, S. Z. Knezevic, and A. Martin. 2001. Glyphosate‐Resistant Soybean Cultivar Yields Compared with Sister Lines. Agronomy Journal 93 (2): 408–412.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Entrikin, J. N. 1984. Carl O. Sauer, Philosopher in Spite of Himself. Geographical Review 74 (4): 387–408.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• FAO [Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations]. 1997. State of the World's Plant Genetic Resources for Food and Agriculture. Rome: FAO.
   Google Scholar
• FAO [Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations]. 2002. U.S. Secretary of Agriculture: “The World Must Unite to Fight Hunger and Poverty; Success Will Require an International Coalition.” Press Release 01/85 c9. [http:www.fao.orgWAICENTOISPRESS_NEPRESSENG2001preno185.htm].
   Google Scholar
• FAO [Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations]. 2005. Monitoring the Environmental Effects of GM Crops: FAO Expert Consultation Recommends Guidelines and Methodologies. Rome: FAO Newsroom. [http:www.fao.orgnewsroomennews200589259index.html].
   Google Scholar
• Fleisher, A. 2003. West Africa: Background Briefing on the President's Meetings with President Wade and with the Leaders of the West African Democracies. Transcript. Washington, D.C.: The White House.
   Google Scholar
• Forsyth, T. 2003. Critical Political Ecology: The Politics of Environmental Science. London: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Gersema, E. 2003. Soybean Planting at Lowest since 1998. Associated Press. 30 June. [http:www.agbios.com/main.php?action‐ShowNewsItem‐4551].
   Google Scholar
• GRAIN [Genetic Resources Action International]. 2001. “TRIPS‐plus” through the Back Door: How Bilateral Treaties Impose Much Stronger Rules for IPRs on Life Than the WTO. [http:www.grain.org/briefings/?id‐6].
   Google Scholar
• Haslberger, A. G. 2003. Codex Guidelines for GM Food Include the Analysis of Unintended Effects. Nature Biotechnology 21 (7): 739–742.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Heffernan D., and M. Hendrickson. 2002. Multi‐National Concentrated Food Processing and Marketing Systems and the Farm Crisis. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Association for the Advancement of Science, Boston.
   Google Scholar
• Herdt, R. W. 1999. Enclosing the Global Plant Genetic Commons. Paper prepared for delivery at the China Center for Economic Research, 24 May, based on a paper presented at the Institute for International Studies, Stanford University, 14 January.
   Google Scholar
• Hyde, J., M. A. Martin, P. V. Preckel, and R. Edwards. 1999. The Economics of Bt Corn: Adoption Implications. Purdue University Agricultural Communications Online Publications, ID‐219, 1–18. [http:www.biotech‐info.netbt_economics.pdf].
   Google Scholar
• IISD [International Institute for Sustainable Development]. 1999. A Summary Report of the Workshop on Agricultural Biotechnology and Rural Development. Sustainable Developments 26 (1): 1–8.
   Google Scholar
• ISAAA [International Service for the Acquisition of Agri‐biotech Applications]. 2004. Preview: Global Status of Commercialized Biotech/GM Crops: 2004. [http:www.isaaa.org].
   Google Scholar
• Jaffe, G. 2003. Planting Trouble: Are Farmers Squandering Bt Corn Technology? An Analysis of USDA Data Showing Significant Noncompliance with EPA's Refuge Requirements. Washington, D.C.: Center for Science in the Public Interest. [http:www.cspinet.orgnewpdfbt_corn_report.pdf].
   Google Scholar
• Juma, C., J. M. Mugabe, and P. Kameri‐mbote, eds. 1994. Coming to Life: Biotechnology in African Economic Recovery. Nairobi: ACTS Press and Zed Books.
   Google Scholar
• Kaplinski, N., D. Braun, D. Lisch, A. Hay, S. Hake, and M. Freeling. 2002. Biodiversity (Communications Arising): Maize Transgene Results in Mexico Are Artifacts. Nature 416 (6881): 601–602.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kay, L. E. 1993. The Molecular Vision of Life: Caltech, the Rockefeller Foundation, and the Rise of the New Biology. New York: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Kloppenburg, J. R., Jr., and D. L. Kleinman. 1987. The Plant Germplasm Controversy. BioScience 37 (3): 190–198.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lele, U. 2004. The CGIAR at 31: An Independent Meta‐Evaluation of the Consultative Group on International Agricultural Research. Washington, D.C.: World Bank.
   Google Scholar
• Matthews, J. 2002. Amaizing Disgrace. The Ecologist, May, 30.
   Google Scholar
• Mcafee, K. 2003a. Biotech Battles: Plants, Power, and Intellectual Property in the New Global Governance Regimes. In Engineering Trouble: Biotechnology and Its Discontents, edited by R. A. Schurman and D. D. T. Kelso, 174–194. Berkeley: University of California Press.
   Google Scholar
• Mcafee, K. 2003b. Corn Culture and Dangerous DNA: Real and Imagined Consequences of Maize Transgene Flow in Oaxaca. Journal of Latin American Geography 2: 18–42.
   Google Scholar
• Mcafee, K. 2003c. Neoliberalism on the Molecular Scale: Economic and Genetic Reductionism in Biotechnology Battles. GeoForum 34 (2): 203–222.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mcafee, K. Forthcoming. Sostenibilidad y justicia social en el sistema alimentario global. In Nuestras tierras, nuestros alimentos, nuestras vidas: Movimientos de campesinos, comercio, y medio ambiente en las Américas, edited by A. Cohn, J. Cook, M. Fernandez, and R. Reider. New Haven, Conn.: Yale School of Forestry and Environmental Studies. [http:www.yale.eduenvironmentpublications].
   Google Scholar
• Mcconnell, F. 1996. The Biodiversity Convention: A Negotiating History. London: Kluwer Law International.
   Google Scholar
• Mcmichael, P. 2004. Global Development and the Corporate Food Regime. Agribusiness Accountability Initiative Clearinghouse. [http:www.agribusinessaccountability.org/page/231?order_by=Abstract].
   Google Scholar
• Mellon, M., and J. Rissler, eds. 1998. Now or Never: Serious New Plans to Save a Natural Pest Control. Cambridge, Mass.: Union of Concerned Scientists.
   Google Scholar
• Meyer, P., F. Linn, I. Heidmann, H. Meyer, I. Niedenhof, and H. Saedler. 1992. Endogenous and Environmental Factors Influence 35S Promoter Methylation of a Maize A1 Gene Construct in Transgenic Petunia and Its Colour Phenotype. Molecular Genes and Genetics 231 (3): 345–352.
   Google Scholar
• Monsanto Corporation. 2004. 2003 Annual Report. [http:www.monsanto.commonsantolayoutinvestorfinancialarchive2003AnnualReport.asp].
   Google Scholar
• Murphy, S. 2002. Managing the Invisible Hand: Markets, Farmers and International Trade. Minneapolis, Minn.: Institute for Agriculture and Trade Policy.
   Google Scholar
• Nadal, N. 2001. The Environmental &Social Impacts of Economic Liberalization on Corn Production in Mexico. Oxford: World Wildlife Fund and Oxfam. [http:www.oxfam.org.ukwhat_we_doissueslivelihoodsdownloadscorn_mexico.pdf].
   Google Scholar
• NAS [National Academy of Sciences]. 2000. Transgenic Plants and World Agriculture. Washington, D.C.: National Academy Press. [http:www.nap.edubooksNI000227html].
   Google Scholar
• NAS [National Academy of Sciences]. 2002. Environmental Effects of Transgenic Plants: The Scope and Adequacy of Regulation. Washington, D.C.: National Academy Press. [http:www.nap.edubooks0309082633html].
   Google Scholar
• NCB [Nuffield Council on Bioethics]. 2004. The Use of Genetically Modified Crops in Developing Countries. Follow‐up Discussion Paper. [http:www.nuffieldbioethics.orggoourworkgmcropspage_218.html].
   Google Scholar
• NFFC [National Family Farm Coalition]. 2004. Fair Trade Policy: Promoting Food Sovereignty. [http:www.nffc.netissuesfairfair_1.html].
   Google Scholar
• OECD [Organisation for Economic Co‐operation and Development]. 2000. Economic Impacts of Genetically Modified Crops on the Agri‐Food Sector: A Synthesis. Working Document. Paris: OECD Secretariat.
   Google Scholar
• Ohio State University. 2002. Scientific Methods Workshop: Ecological and Agronomic Consequences of Gene Flow from Transgenic Crops to Wild Relatives, March 5 and 6, Columbus, Ohio. [http:www.biosci.ohio‐state.eduasnowlabgene_flow.htm].
   Google Scholar
• Pallottini, L., E. Garcia, J. Kami, G. Barcaccia, and P. Gepts. 2004. The Genetic Identity of a Patented Yellow Bean. Crop Science 44 (3): 968–977.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pardey, P. G., ed. 2001. The Future of Food: Biotechnology Markets and Policies in an International Setting. Washington, D.C.: International Food Policy Research Institute.
   Google Scholar
• Pollack, A. 2003. Widely Used Crop Herbicide Is Losing Weed Resistance. New York Times (Late Edition, Final), 14 January, §C, 1.
   Google Scholar
• Press, E., and J. Washburn. 2000. The Kept University: Commercially Sponsored Research Is Putting at Risk the Paramount Value of a Higher Education, Disinterested Inquiry. Atlantic Monthly, March, 39–53.
   Google Scholar
• Quist, D., and I. Chapela. 2001. Transgenic DNA Introgressed into Traditional Maize Landraces in Oaxaca, Mexico. Nature 414 (6863): 541–543.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Robbins, P. 2004. Political Ecology: A Critical Introduction. Oxford: Blackwell.
   Google Scholar
• Rocha, V. de O. 2003. Biotechnology in Brazil: Legal and Economic Aspects. Harvard University, David Rockefeller Center for Latin American Studies. [http:www.veirano.com.br/html/english/conteudo_articles.cgi?ARTIGO‐13].
   Google Scholar
• Rodarte, O. A. 2003. Toward an Equitable, Inclusive, and Sustainable Agriculture: Mexico's Basic Grain Producers Unite. In Confronting Globalization: Economic Integration and Popular Resistance in Mexico, edited by T. A. Wise, H. Salazar, and L. Carlsen, 129–148. Bloomfield, Conn.: Kumarian Press.
   Google Scholar
• Royal Society of London. 2002. Transgenic Plants and World Agriculture. Report prepared under the auspices of the Royal Society of London, the U.S. National Academy of Sciences, the Brazilian Academy of Sciences, the Chinese Academy of Sciences, the Indian National Science Academy, the Mexican Academy of Sciences, and the Third World Academy of Sciences. Washington, D.C.: National Academy Press.
   Google Scholar
• Serageldin, I., and G. J. Persley. 2000. Promethean Science: Agricultural Biotechnology, the Environment, and the Poor. Washington, D.C.: Consultative Group on International Agricultural Research.
   Google Scholar
• Snow, A. A., D. Pilson, L. H. Rieseberg, M. J. Paulsen, N. Pleskac, M. R. Reagon, D. E. Wolfe, and S. M. Selbo. 2002. A Bt Transgene Reduces Herbivory and Enhances Fecundity in Wild Sunflowers. Ecological Applications 13 (2): 279–286.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stewart, P. 2003. Monsanto to Double Brazil Sales by 2003. Reuters News Service. São Paulo, Brazil, 29 October.
   Google Scholar
• UNDP [U.N. Development Programme]. 2001. Making New Technologies Work for Human Development. Human Development Report 2001. New York: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• UNEP/CBD [U.N. Environment Programme Convention on Biological Diversity]. 1994. Convention on Biological Diversity: Text and Annexes. Châtelaine, Switzerland: Interim Secretariat for the Convention on Biological Diversity.
   Google Scholar
• UNEP/CBDICCP [U.N. Environment Programme / Convention on Biological Diversity Intergovernmental Committee for the Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety]. 2002. Intergovernmental Committee for the Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety, Third Meeting, The Hague, 22–26 April 2002. Capacity‐Building (Article 22, Article 28). Note by the Executive Secretary. [http:www.biodiv.org/doc/meeting.aspx?mtg=ICCP‐03].
   Google Scholar
• UNEP/GEF [U.N. Environment Programme Global Environment Facility]. 2003. Biosafety News, 4 June.
   Google Scholar
• Uphoff, N., ed. 2002. Agroecological Innovations: Increasing Food Production with Participatory Development. London: Earthscan.
   Google Scholar
• USAID [U.S. Agency for International Development]. 2002. Collaborative Agriculture Biotechnology Initiative: Mobilizing New Science and Technology to Reduce Poverty and Hunger. Press release. [http:www.usaid.govpressreleases2002fs020612.html].
   Google Scholar
• USDA [U.S. Department of Agriculture]. 2003. U.S. and Cooperating Countries File WTO Case against EU Moratorium on Biotech Foods and Crops. Press release. [http:www.ustr.govDocument_LibraryPress_Releases2003MayU.S._Cooperating_Countries_File_WTO_Case_Against_EU_Moratorium_on_Biotech_Foods_Crops.html].
   Google Scholar
• USFAS [U.S. Foreign Agricultural Service]. 2003. Biotechnology and US Agricultural Trade: Training and Capacity Building. [http:www.fas.usda.govitpbiotechdevelopment.html].
   Google Scholar
• Vaughan, S. 2002. Economic Valuation and Trade‐Related Issues. Montreal: Secretariat of the Commission for Environmental Cooperation of North America. [http:www.cec.orgfilespdfVaughan‐e.pdf].
   Google Scholar
• Wargo, J. 1996. Our Children's Toxic Legacy: How Science and Law Fail to Protect Us from Pesticides. New Haven, Conn.: Yale University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Watts, M. 2000. Political Ecology. In A Companion to Economic Geography, edited by E. Sheppard and T. J. Barnes, 257–274. Oxford: Blackwell.
   Google Scholar
• Weiner, T. 2002. In Corn's Cradle, U.S. Imports Bury Family Farms. New York Times (Late Edition, Final), 26 February, §A, 4.
   Google Scholar
• Wise, T. A., H. Salazar, and L. Carlson, eds. 2003. Confronting Globalization: Economic Integration and Popular Resistance in Mexico. Bloomfield, Conn.: Kumarian Press.
   Google Scholar
• Wright, B. 2000. Intellectual Property Rights: Challenges and International Research Collaboration in Agricultural Biotechnology. In Agricultural Biotechnology in Developing Countries: Toward Optimizing Benefits for the Poor, edited by M. Qiam, A. F. Krattinger, and J. Braun, 289–314. Dordrecht, Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
   Google Scholar
• Zimmerer, K. 1996. Changing Fortunes: Biodiversity and Peasant Livelihood in the Peruvian Andes. Berkeley: University of California Press.
   Google Scholar
• Zimmerer, K., and T. J. Bassett, eds. 2003. Political Ecology: An Integrative Approach to Geography and Environment‐Development Studies. New York: Guilford Press.
   Google Scholar