IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/sru/ssewps/2013-12.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Investing in Food Security? Philanthrocapitalism, Biotechnology and Development

Author

Listed:
  • Sally Brooks

    () (Social policy and social work, University of York, UK)

Abstract

This paper traces the evolution of philanthropic involvement in developing country agriculture from the ‘scientific philanthropy’ of the Rockefeller Foundation during and after the Green Revolution era to the ‘philathrocapitalism’ of the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, by examining two cases of ‘pro-poor’ agricultural biotechnology research: pro-Vitamin A-enriched ‘Golden Rice’ and drought tolerant maize. In each case, novel institutions developed for technology transfer have created conditions conducive to future capitalist accumulation in ways that are not immediately obvious. These initiatives can be understood as institutional experiments that are shifting debates about the governance and regulation of genetically modified (‘GM’) crops. Meanwhile an emphasis on silver bullet solutions and institutions that ‘connect to the market’ diverts attention from more context-responsive approaches. This trend is likely to intensify with the announcement at the recent G8 summit backing a ‘New Alliance for Food Security and Nutrition’ in which agri-business corporations are to play a key role.

Suggested Citation

  • Sally Brooks, 2013. "Investing in Food Security? Philanthrocapitalism, Biotechnology and Development," SPRU Working Paper Series 2013-12, SPRU - Science and Technology Policy Research, University of Sussex.
  • Handle: RePEc:sru:ssewps:2013-12
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sussex.ac.uk/spru/documents/2013-12-swps-brooks.pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Paul Nightingale & Alister Scott, 2007. "Peer review and the relevance gap: Ten suggestions for policy-makers," Science and Public Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 34(8), pages 543-553, October.
    2. Ismael Rafols & Martin Meyer, 2008. "Diversity and network coherence as indicators of interdisciplinarity: Case studies in bionanoscience," SPRU Working Paper Series 167, SPRU - Science and Technology Policy Research, University of Sussex.
    3. James D. Adams & J. Roger Clemmons, 2011. "The role of search in university productivity: inside, outside, and interdisciplinary dimensions," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press, pages 215-251.
    4. Nicolas Carayol & Thuc Uyen Nguyen Thi, 2005. "Why do academic scientists engage in interdisciplinary research?," Research Evaluation, Oxford University Press, vol. 14(1), pages 70-79, April.
    5. Bo Göransson & Rasigan Maharajh & Ulrich Schmoch, 2009. "New activities of universities in transfer and extension: multiple requirements and manifold solutions," Science and Public Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 36(2), pages 157-164, March.
    6. van Rijnsoever, Frank J. & Hessels, Laurens K., 2011. "Factors associated with disciplinary and interdisciplinary research collaboration," Research Policy, Elsevier, pages 463-472.
    7. Grit Laudel, 2006. "Conclave in the Tower of Babel: how peers review interdisciplinary research proposals," Research Evaluation, Oxford University Press, vol. 15(1), pages 57-68, April.
    8. Andy Stirling, 2007. "A General Framework for Analysing Diversity in Science, Technology and Society," SPRU Working Paper Series 156, SPRU - Science and Technology Policy Research, University of Sussex.
    9. Lemarchand, Guillermo A., 2012. "The long-term dynamics of co-authorship scientific networks: Iberoamerican countries (1973–2010)," Research Policy, Elsevier, pages 291-305.
    10. Ismael Rafols & Alan Porter & Loet Leydesdorff, 2009. "Overlay Maps of Science: a New Tool for Research Policy," SPRU Working Paper Series 179, SPRU - Science and Technology Policy Research, University of Sussex.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    More about this item

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:sru:ssewps:2013-12. 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: (Russell Eke). General contact details of provider: http://edirc.repec.org/data/spessuk.html .

    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.

    We have no references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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.