Agricultural Communications Documentation Center, Funk Library, University of Illinois Document Number: D05928
Notes:
Pages 27-38 in Allan Eaglesham, Sandra Ristow and Ralph W.F. Hardy (eds.) Biotechnology: science and society at a crossroad. NABC Report 15. National Agricultural Biotechnology Council, Ithaca, New York. 292 pages., "...holding innumerable debates about the pros and cons of agricultural biotechnology will not resolve the issues raised here, as long as the problem is framed as a lack of knowledge."
Robertson, Michael J. (author), Preston, Nigel P. (author), and Bonnett, Graham D. (author)
Format:
Book chapter
Publication Date:
2017
Location:
Agricultural Communications Documentation Center, Funk Library, University of Illinois Document Number: D08788
Notes:
Pages 155-172 in Gordon, Iain J. Prins, Herbert H.T. Squire, Geoff R. (eds.), Food production and nature conservation: conflicts and solutions. United Kingdom: Routledge, London. 348 pages.
USA: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Washington, D.C.
Location:
Agricultural Communications Documentation Center, Funk Library, University of Illinois Box: 201 Document Number: D11770
Notes:
Online via AgriMarketing Weekly. 1 page., U.S. Department of Agriculture reports that more than 90 percent of corn, soybean, and cotton acreage involves herbicide-resistant varieties. Currently, 92 percent of U.S. cotton acres are planted with genetically-engineered, insect-resistant seeds and 83 percent of U.S. corn acres.
16 pages, via Online Journal, Crop genetic resources constitute a ‘new’ global commons, characterized by multiple layers of activities of farmers, genebanks, public and private research and development organizations, and regulatory agencies operating from local to global levels. This paper presents sui generis biocultural community protocols that were developed by four communities in Benin and Madagascar to improve their ability to contribute to, and benefit from, the crop commons. The communities were motivated in part by the fact that their national governments’ had recently ratified the Plant Treaty and the Nagoya Protocol, which make commitments to promoting the rights of indigenous peoples, local communities and farmers, without being prescriptive as to how Contracting Parties should implement those commitments. The communities identified the protocols as useful means to advance their interests and/or rights under both the Plant Treaty and the Nagoya Protocol to be recognized as managers of local socio-ecological systems, to access genetic resources from outside the communities, and to control others’ access to resources managed by the community.
