IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/cog/poango/v7y2019i4p165-177.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Conflicts over GMOs and their Contribution to Food Democracy

Author

Listed:
  • Beate Friedrich

    (Institute of Sustainability Governance, Leuphana University of Lüneburg, Germany)

  • Sarah Hackfort

    (IZT—Institute for Future Studies and Technology Assessment, Germany)

  • Miriam Boyer

    (Department of Agriculture and Food Policy, Faculty of Life Sciences, Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, Germany)

  • Daniela Gottschlich

    (Institute for Diversity, Nature, Gender and Sustainability, Germany)

Abstract

The use of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) embodies a specific vision of agricultural systems that is highly controversial. The article focuses on how conflicts over GMOs contribute towards food democracy. Food democracy is defined as the possibility for all social groups to participate in, negotiate and struggle over how societies organize agricultural production, thereby ensuring that food systems fulfil the needs of people and sustain (re)productive nature into the future. EU agricultural policy envisages the coexistence of agricultural and food systems with and without GMOs. This policy, which on the surface appears to be a means of avoiding conflict, has in fact exacerbated conflict, while creating obstacles to the development of food democracy. By contrast, empirical analysis of movements against GMOs in Germany and Poland shows how they create pathways towards participation in the food system and the creation of alternative agricultural futures, thereby contributing to a democratization of food systems and thus of society–nature relations. Today, as products of new breeding techniques such as genome editing are being released, these movements are gaining new relevance.

Suggested Citation

  • Beate Friedrich & Sarah Hackfort & Miriam Boyer & Daniela Gottschlich, 2019. "Conflicts over GMOs and their Contribution to Food Democracy," Politics and Governance, Cogitatio Press, vol. 7(4), pages 165-177.
  • Handle: RePEc:cog:poango:v:7:y:2019:i:4:p:165-177
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.cogitatiopress.com/politicsandgovernance/article/view/2082
    Download Restriction: no

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Biesecker, Adelheid & Hofmeister, Sabine, 2010. "Focus: (Re)productivity: Sustainable relations both between society and nature and between the genders," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(8), pages 1703-1711, June.
    2. Basil Bornemann & Sabine Weiland, 2019. "Empowering People—Democratising the Food System? Exploring the Democratic Potential of Food-Related Empowerment Forms," Politics and Governance, Cogitatio Press, vol. 7(4), pages 105-118.
    3. Philip H. Howard, 2009. "Visualizing Consolidation in the Global Seed Industry: 1996–2008," Sustainability, MDPI, Open Access Journal, vol. 1(4), pages 1-22, December.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Basil Bornemann & Sabine Weiland, 2019. "Editorial: New Perspectives on Food Democracy," Politics and Governance, Cogitatio Press, vol. 7(4), pages 1-7.
    2. Beate Friedrich, 2019. "Pathways of Conflict: Lessons from the Cultivation of MON810 in Germany in 2005–2008 for Emerging Conflicts over New Breeding Techniques," Sustainability, MDPI, Open Access Journal, vol. 12(1), pages 1-17, December.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Galushko, Viktoriya & Gray, Richard & Smyth, Stuart & Arnison, Paul, 2010. "Resolving FTO Barriers in GM Canola," 14th ICABR Conference, June 16-18, 2010, Ravello, Italy 188092, International Consortium on Applied Bioeconomy Research (ICABR).
    2. Paul Vincelli, 2016. "Genetic Engineering and Sustainable Crop Disease Management: Opportunities for Case-by-Case Decision-Making," Sustainability, MDPI, Open Access Journal, vol. 8(5), pages 1-22, May.
    3. Ming Tang & Huchang Liao & Zhengjun Wan & Enrique Herrera-Viedma & Marc A. Rosen, 2018. "Ten Years of Sustainability (2009 to 2018): A Bibliometric Overview," Sustainability, MDPI, Open Access Journal, vol. 10(5), pages 1-21, May.
    4. Basil Bornemann & Sabine Weiland, 2019. "Editorial: New Perspectives on Food Democracy," Politics and Governance, Cogitatio Press, vol. 7(4), pages 1-7.
    5. Paul Oldham & Stephen Hall & Oscar Forero, 2013. "Biological Diversity in the Patent System," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 8(11), pages 1-16, November.
    6. Mark Tilzey, 2019. "Food Democracy as ‘Radical’ Food Sovereignty: Agrarian Democracy and Counter-Hegemonic Resistance to the Neo-Imperial Food Regime," Politics and Governance, Cogitatio Press, vol. 7(4), pages 202-213.
    7. Julia Behringer & Peter H. Feindt, 2019. "How Shall We Judge Agri-Food Governance? Legitimacy Constructions in Food Democracy and Co-Regulation Discourses," Politics and Governance, Cogitatio Press, vol. 7(4), pages 119-130.
    8. Eric C. Davis & Ani L. Katchova, 2020. "The Impact of Bank Deregulations on Farm Financial Stress and Stability," Sustainability, MDPI, Open Access Journal, vol. 12(4), pages 1-14, February.
    9. Sylvie Bonny, 2017. "Corporate Concentration and Technological Change in the Global Seed Industry," Sustainability, MDPI, Open Access Journal, vol. 9(9), pages 1-25, September.
    10. Daniela Gottschlich & Leonie Bellina, 2017. "Environmental justice and care: critical emancipatory contributions to sustainability discourse," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 34(4), pages 941-953, December.
    11. Borgen, Svein Ole & Aarset, Bernt, 2016. "Participatory Innovation: Lessons from breeding cooperatives," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 145(C), pages 99-105.
    12. Frances Moore Lappé, 2016. "Farming for a Small Planet: Agroecology Now," Development, Palgrave Macmillan;Society for International Deveopment, vol. 59(3), pages 299-307, December.
    13. Stefanie Gerold & Matthias Nocker, 2015. "Reduction of Working Time in Austria. A Mixed Methods Study Relating a New Work Time Policy to Employee Preferences. WWWforEurope Working Paper No. 97," WIFO Studies, WIFO, number 58139, March.
    14. Euler, Johannes, 2018. "Conceptualizing the Commons: Moving Beyond the Goods-based Definition by Introducing the Social Practices of Commoning as Vital Determinant," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 143(C), pages 10-16.
    15. Katherine Mintz, 2017. "Arguments and actors in recent debates over US genetically modified organisms (GMOs)," Journal of Environmental Studies and Sciences, Springer;Association of Environmental Studies and Sciences, vol. 7(1), pages 1-9, March.
    16. Scott M. Swinton & Braeden Deynze, 2017. "Hoes to Herbicides: Economics of Evolving Weed Management in the United States," The European Journal of Development Research, Palgrave Macmillan;European Association of Development Research and Training Institutes (EADI), vol. 29(3), pages 560-574, July.
    17. Daniela Soleri, 2018. "Civic seeds: new institutions for seed systems and communities—a 2016 survey of California seed libraries," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 35(2), pages 331-347, June.
    18. Fischer, Klara, 2016. "Why new crop technology is not scale-neutral—A critique of the expectations for a crop-based African Green Revolution," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(6), pages 1185-1194.
    19. Sarah-Louise Ruder & Sophia Rose Sanniti, 2019. "Transcending the Learned Ignorance of Predatory Ontologies: A Research Agenda for an Ecofeminist-Informed Ecological Economics," Sustainability, MDPI, Open Access Journal, vol. 11(5), pages 1-29, March.
    20. Angela Franz-Balsen, 2014. "Gender and (Un)Sustainability—Can Communication Solve a Conflict of Norms?," Sustainability, MDPI, Open Access Journal, vol. 6(4), pages 1-19, April.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:cog:poango:v:7:y:2019:i:4:p:165-177. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (António Vieira). General contact details of provider: http://www.cogitatiopress.com/ .

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.