On risk and regulation: Bt crops in India

References

• Herring RJ. Opposition to transgenic technologies: ideology, interests, and collective action frames. Nat Rev Genet 2008; 9: 458-463; PMID:18487989; http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/nrg2338
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Robert LP. 2008. Starved for Science. Harvard University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Pinstrup-Andersen P, Ebbe S. 2000. Seeds of Contention: World Hunger and the Global Controversy over GM Crops. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Roy D. Of choices and dilemmas: Bt cotton and self-identified organic cotton farmers in Gujarat. Asian Biotechnol Dev Rev 2010; 12:(1):51-79.
   Google Scholar
• James C. Global Status of Commercialized Biotech/GM Crops. Annual. Ithaca, NY: International Service for the Acquisition of Agri-Biotech Applications.
   Google Scholar
• Herring RJ, Rao NC. “On the ‘Failure of Bt Cotton’: Analysing a Decade of Experience,” Econ Polit Weekly 2012; 47:(18):45-54.
   Google Scholar
• Gruère GP, Debdatta S. “Bt cotton and farmer suicides: an evidence-based assessment,” J Dev Stud 2011; 47:(2): 316-37; PMID:21506303; http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00220388.2010.492863
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Knight FH. 1921. Risk, Uncertainty, and Profit. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.
   Google Scholar
• Douglas M, Wildavsky A. 1982. Risk and Culture. University of California Press.
   Google Scholar
• Schurman RA, William AM. 2010. Fighting for the Future of Food: Activists Versus Agribusiness in the Struggle over Biotechnology. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
   Google Scholar
• European Commission. 2010. A Decade of EU-Funded GMO Research, 2001–2010. Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union.
   Google Scholar
• DeFrancesco L. How safe does transgenic food need to be? Nat Biotechnol 2013; 31:9794-802 2013; PMID:23302915; http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/nbt.2686
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Genetic Literacy Project. 2013. http://www.geneticliteracyproject.org/2013/08/27/glp-infographic-international-science-organizations-on-crop-biotechnology-safety/#.Uo_I4ihOS-J; Cambridge, MA.
   Google Scholar
• Paarlberg RL. 2001. The Politics of Precaution: Genetically Modified Crops in Developing Countries. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Gupta A. An evolving science-society contract in India: the search for legitimacy in anticipatory risk governance. Food Policy 2011; 36:(336-41); http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.foodpol.2011.07.011
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Herring RJ, Rao NC. “On the ‘Failure of Bt Cotton’: Analysing a Decade of Experience,” Econ Polit Weekly 2012; 47:(18), 45-54.
   Google Scholar
• Rao NC. Bt cotton yields and performance: data and methodological issues. Econ & Polit Weekly 2013; xlviii:33
   Google Scholar
• Kathage J, Matin Q. “Economic Impacts and Impact Dynamics of Bt (Bacillus Thuringiensis) Cotton in India,” Proc Nat Acad Sci 2012; 109:(29):11652-656; http://dx.doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1203647109.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Herring RJ. Re-constructing Facts in Bt Cotton. Econ Polit Weekly 2013; 48:(18) 33 2013.
   Google Scholar
• Kolady DE, William L. Potential welfare benefits from the public-private partnerships: a case of genetically engineered eggplant in India. J Food, Agr & Environ 2008; 6:(3&4).
   Google Scholar
• Kloor K. 2014. The GMO-Suicide Myth. Issues in Science and Technology. Winter. Richardson: National Academy Press. Pp 65-70.
   Google Scholar
• Rao CK. “Why do cattle die eating Bt cotton plants only in the Telengana Region of Andhra Pradesh in India?” 2007b; ( Available at http://www.plantbiotechnology.org.in/issues.html accessed May 30, 2009).
   Google Scholar
• Ministry of Environment and Forests, Genetic Engineering Approval Committee. 2009. Report of the Expert Committee (EC-II) on Bt Brinjal Event EE-1 Developed by: M/s Maharashtra Hybrid Seeds Company Ltd. (MAHYCO), Mumbai; University of Agricultural Sciences (UAS), Dharwad; and Tamil Nadu Agricultural University (TNAU), Coimbatore. October 8. (New Delhi: Government of India).
   Google Scholar
• Herring RJ. In Press. ‘State science, risk and agricultural biotechnology: Bt cotton to Bt Brinjal in India.’ J Peasant Stud. The Hague: Netherlands.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Krishna VV, Qaim M. Estimating the adoption of Bt eggplant in India: Who Benefits from public–private partnership? Food Policy 2007; 32:523-43; http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.foodpol.2006.11.002.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ministry of Environment and Forests (MoEF) (2010) Decision on Commercialisation ofBt-Brinjal MOS(IjC)E&F February 9th, 2010 (New Delhi: Ministry of Environment and Forests).
   Google Scholar
• Shah E. ‘Science’ in the risk politics of Bt Brinjal. Econ Polit Weekly 2011;xlvi, 31.
   Google Scholar
• Rao CK. 2010. Moratorium on Bt Brinjal. (Bangalore: FBAE).
   Google Scholar
• Séralini GE. 2013. Food and chemical toxicology. [Retraction] available from: http://www.gmwatch.org/files/Letter_AWHayes_GES.pdf
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Herring RJ. ed. 2007c. Transgenics and the Poor: Biotechnology in Development Studies. Oxon/London: Routledge. Paperback 2008.
   Google Scholar
• Jayaraman K. Bt Brinjal Splits Indian Cabinet. Nat Biotechnol 2010; April, 28:296.
   Google Scholar
• AgBioWorld, December 29, 2010: Academies maintain Bt brinjal is safe. Auburn, AL.
   Google Scholar
• Herring RJ. 2010. Framing the GMO: Epistemic Brokers, Authoritative Knowledge and Diffusion of Opposition to Biotechnology. In Rebecca Kolins Givan, Kenneth M. Roberts and Sarah A. Soule (Eds). The Diffusion of Social Movements. N.Y.: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Agin D. 2006. Junk Science: An Overdue Assessment of Government, Industry and Faith Groups That Twist Science For Their Own Gain. New York: St Martin's Press.
   Google Scholar
• Specter M. 2009. Denialism. New York and London. Penguin.
   Google Scholar
• Woo-Cummings, Ed. 1999. The Developmental State. Ithaca and London: Cornell University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Cohen JI. “Poor nations turn to publicly developed GM crops.” Nat Biotechnol 2005; 23:(1): 27-33 2005; PMID:15637614; http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/nbt0105-27
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Herring RJ, Millind K. 2009. Illicit Seeds: Intellectual Property and the Underground Proliferation of Agricultural Biotechnologies. In Sebastian H, Kenneth CS (Eds). The Politics of Intellectual Property: Contestation over the Ownership, Use, and Control of Knowledge and Information. Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar.
   Google Scholar