Vis enkel innførsel

dc.contributor.authorHolmes, Matthew Robert
dc.date.accessioned2023-03-22T10:01:01Z
dc.date.available2023-03-22T10:01:01Z
dc.date.created2022-09-12T11:49:26Z
dc.date.issued2022
dc.identifier.citationHolmes, M. (2022). Perspectives on biotechnology: Public and corporate narratives in the GM archives. Plants, People, Planet, 4(5), 476-484.en_US
dc.identifier.issn2572-2611
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/11250/3059768
dc.description.abstractSocietal Impact Statement The contentious debate over genetically modified (GM) crops in Britain has entered a new era following Brexit and the development of gene editing. At the same time, the events of the 1980s and 1990s are now entering historical archives, including the GM Archive at the Science Museum in London. This article explores how fears of unnaturalness and arguments from historical continuity informed the British GM controversy. It also analyses the limitations of these modern archives. The concerns surrounding the naturalness and continuity of biotechnology have recently been resurrected following suggestions that gene editing will be employed in plant breeding. Summary This research examines the introduction of genetically modified (GM) crops to Britain, including the backlash from environmentalist groups and the public that led to a de facto government moratorium on their commercialisation in 1998. Harnessing archival materials from the Science Museum's GM Archive, this paper shows that GM was viewed as an alien or unnatural technology in Britain, while campaigns from Monsanto and scientific supporters of GM attempted to show how recombinant DNA technology was simply the latest step in a long history of plant breeding. By moving outside the archive, it becomes clear that the creation of this narrative from continuity was a standard industry strategy. Appeals to the history of plant breeding was a strategy adopted by Monsanto well before the British GM controversy, while twentieth-century food scares had already undermined public trust in government and industry. Public concern over the naturalness of biotechnology remains. Meanwhile, contemporary advocates of gene editing have begun to make similar arguments to those deployed in the 1990s, highlighting the similarity of gene editing to natural variation and selection.en_US
dc.language.isoengen_US
dc.publisherWileyen_US
dc.rightsNavngivelse 4.0 Internasjonal*
dc.rights.urihttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/deed.no*
dc.titlePerspectives on biotechnology: Public and corporate narratives in the GM archivesen_US
dc.typePeer revieweden_US
dc.typeJournal articleen_US
dc.description.versionpublishedVersionen_US
dc.rights.holderThe authorsen_US
dc.subject.nsiVDP::Samfunnsvitenskap: 200en_US
dc.subject.nsiVDP::Landbruks- og Fiskerifag: 900en_US
dc.source.pagenumber476-484en_US
dc.source.volume4en_US
dc.source.journalPlants, People, Planeten_US
dc.source.issue5en_US
dc.identifier.doi10.1002/ppp3.10283
dc.identifier.cristin2050739
cristin.ispublishedtrue
cristin.fulltextoriginal
cristin.qualitycode1


Tilhørende fil(er)

Thumbnail

Denne innførselen finnes i følgende samling(er)

Vis enkel innførsel

Navngivelse 4.0 Internasjonal
Med mindre annet er angitt, så er denne innførselen lisensiert som Navngivelse 4.0 Internasjonal