How agricultural research systems shape a technological regime that develops genetic engineering but locks out agroecological innovations

Vanloqueren, Gaetan; Baret, Philippe V.

doi:10.1016/j.respol.2009.02.008

Article (Scientific journals)

How agricultural research systems shape a technological regime that develops genetic engineering but locks out agroecological innovations

Vanloqueren, Gaetan; Baret, Philippe V.

2009 • In Research Policy, 38 (6), p. 971 - 983

Peer Reviewed verified by ORBi

Permalink
https://hdl.handle.net/2268/323180

DOI
10.1016/j.respol.2009.02.008

Files (1)Send to Details Statistics Bibliography Similar publications

Files

Full Text

VanloquerenBaret2009_ResearchPolicy_GeneticEngineeringVsAgroecology.pdf

Author postprint (477.85 kB)

Download

All documents in ORBi are protected by a user license.

Send to

RIS BibTex APA Chicago Permalink X Linkedin

Details

Keywords :

Evolutionary economics; Lock-in; Path dependence; Technological trajectories; Transgenic plants; Strategy and Management; Management Science and Operations Research; Management of Technology and Innovation

Abstract :

[en] Agricultural science and technology (S&T) is under great scrutiny. Reorientation towards more holistic approaches, including agroecology, has recently been backed by a global international assessment of agriculture S&T for development (IAASTD). Understanding the past and current trends of agricultural S&T is crucial if such recommendations are to be implemented. This paper shows how the concepts of technological paradigms and trajectories can help analyse the agricultural S&T landscape and dynamics. Genetic engineering and agroecology can be usefully analysed as two different technological paradigms, even though they have not been equally successful in influencing agricultural research. We used a Systems of Innovation (SI) approach to identify the determinants of innovation (the factors that influence research choices) within agricultural research systems. The influence of each determinant is systematically described (e.g. funding priorities, scientists' cognitive and cultural routines etc.). As a result of their interactions, these determinants construct a technological regime and a lock-in situation that hinders the development of agroecological engineering. Issues linked to breaking out of this lock-in situation are finally discussed. © 2009 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Disciplines :

Business & economic sciences: Multidisciplinary, general & others

Author, co-author :

Vanloqueren, Gaetan ; Université de Liège - ULiège > HEC Liège Research > HEC Liège Research: Social Enterprise and Collective Action for Transition (SECAT) ; Earth and Life Institute, Université catholique de Louvain, Belgium

Baret, Philippe V.; Earth and Life Institute, Université catholique de Louvain, Belgium

Language :

English

Title :

How agricultural research systems shape a technological regime that develops genetic engineering but locks out agroecological innovations

Publication date :

July 2009

Journal title :

Research Policy

ISSN :

0048-7333

eISSN :

1873-7625

Publisher :

Elsevier BV

Volume :

Issue :

Pages :

971 - 983

Peer reviewed :

Peer Reviewed verified by ORBi

Additional URL :

https://api.elsevier.com/content/article/PII:S0048733309000614?httpAccept=text/xml

Funding text :

The authors are grateful to Marco Bertaglia, Gauthier Chapelle, Felice Dassetto, Marc Mormont and Frederic Varone for helpful comments on earlier versions of this paper. The analysis and comments made here remain however our sole responsibility. We would also like to thank the editors and three anonymous reviewers for providing insights that helped to shape this article in its present form. Mélanie Braibant, Jasmina Fiasse and Séverine Goret respectively managed interviews in the sugar beet, maize and soybean agrifood chains. This research was conducted with the financial support of the Belgian National Fund for Scientific Research (FNRS-FRIA).

Available on ORBi :

since 08 October 2024

Statistics

Number of views

12 (1 by ULiège)

Number of downloads

2 (0 by ULiège)

More statistics

Scopus citations^®

447

Scopus citations^®
without self-citations

435

OpenCitations

383

OpenAlex citations

538

Bibliography

Adams J.D. Fundamental stocks of knowledge and productivity growth. The Journal of Political Economy 98 (1990) 673-702
Allaire G., and Wolf S.A. Cognitive representations and institutional hybridity in agrofood innovation. Science, Technology & Human Values 29 (2004) 431-458
Alston J.M., Norton G.W., and Pardey P.G. Science Under Scarcity: Principles and Practice for Agricultural Research Evaluation and Priority Setting (1995), Cornell University Press, Ithaca
Alston J.M., Pardey P.G., and Roseboom J. Financing agricultural research: international investment patterns and policy perspectives. World Development 26 (1998) 1057-1071
Alston J.M., Pardey P.G., and Smith V.H. Financing agricultural R&D in rich countries: what's happening and why. The Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource 42 (1998) 51-82
Alston J.M., Pardey P.G., and Taylor M.J. Agricultural Science Policy. Changing Global Agendas (2001), The John Hopkins University Press, Baltimore and London
Altieri M.A. Agroecology: a new research and development paradigm for world agriculture. Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment 27 (1989) 37-46
Altieri M.A. Agroecology: The Science of Sustainable Agriculture. 2nd ed. (1995), Westview Press, Boulder, Colorado
Arora A., and Gambardella A. The changing technology of technological change: general and abstract knowledge and the division of innovative labour. Research Policy 23 (1994) 523-532
Arthur W.B. Competing technologies, increasing returns, and lock-in by historical events. Economic Journal 99 (1989) 116-131
Auclair D., and Dupraz C. Agroforestry for sustainable land use. Fundamental Research and Modeling with Emphasis on Temperate and Mediterranean Applications (1999), Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht
Badgley C., Moghtader J., Quintero E., et al. Organic agriculture and the global food supply. Renewable Agriculture and Food Systems 22 (2007) 86-108
Balanya B., Doherty A., Hoedeman O., Ma'anit A., and Wesselius E. Europe Inc. Regional & Global restructuring and the Rise of Corporate Power (2003), Pluto Press, London
Bauer H. Barriers against interdisciplinarity: implications for studies of Science, Technology, and Society (STS). Science, Technology & Human Values 15 (1990) 105-119
Bawden R.J. Systems thinking and practice in agriculture. Journal of Dairy Science 74 (1991) 2362-2373
Benyus J. Biomimicry: Innovation Inspired by Nature (1997), Harper Perennial, New York
Bijman J., and Tait J. Public policies influencing innovation in the agrochemical, biotechnology and seed industries. Science and Public Policy 29 (2002) 245-251
Busch, L., Allison, R., Harris, C., Rudy, A., et al., 2004. External Review of the Collaborative Research Agreement between Novartis and the University of California. Institute for Food and Agricultural Standards, Michigan State University.
Callon M., and Bowker G. Is Science a Public Good? Science. Technology and Human Values 19 4 (1994) 395-424
Cerny P.G. Paradoxes of the competition state: the dynamics of political globalization. Government and Opposition 31 2 (1997) 251-274
Chataway J., Tait J., and Wield D. Understanding company R&D strategies in agro-biotechnology: trajectories and blind spots. Research Policy 33 (2004) 1041-1057
Checkland P.B. Systems Thinking Systems Practice (1981), John Wiley, New York
Cohen B.C. The Press and Foreign Policy (1963), Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ, USA
Congress of the US. National Innovation Act. 109th Congress of the United States. 1st Session, S. 2109. Washington, December 15 (2005)
Conway G.R. The Doubly Green Revolution: Food for All in the Twenty-First Century (1999), Cornell University Press, Ithaca
Cowan R., and Gunby P. Sprayed to death: path dependence, lock-in and pest control strategies. Economic Journal 106 (1996) 521-542
Dalgaard T., Hutchings N.J., and Porter J.R. Agroecology, scaling and interdisciplinarity. Agriculture Ecosystems & Environment 100 (2003) 39-51
David P.A., and Arthur B. Clio and the economics of QWERTY. American Economic Review 75 (1985) 337
Dosi G. Technological paradigms and technological trajectories: a suggested interpretation of the determinants and directions of technical change. Research Policy 11 (1982) 147-162
Dupuis E.M. Not in my body: rBGH and the rise of organic milk. Agriculture and Human Values 17 (2000) 295
Edquist C. Systems of Innovation: Technologies (1997), Institutions and Organizations, Pinter/Cassel, London
Edquist C. The Systems of Innovation Approach and Innovation Policy: an account of the state of the art. Lead paper presented at the DRUID Conference. Aalborg, June 12-15 (2001)
Esquinas-Alcázar J. Protecting crop genetic diversity for food security: political, ethical and technical challenges. Nature Reviews Genetics 6 (2006) 946-953
European Commission. Communication from the Commission to the Council, the European Parliament, the Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of Regions. Life Sciences and Biotechnology: A Strategy for Europe (2002) (COM(2002)2)
European Commission, 2004. Plants for the future: a 2025 vision for European plant biotechnology. Directorate-General for Research Food Quality and Safety (EUR 21359 EN).
European Commission, 2005a. Communication from the Commission Building the ERA of knowledge for growth [COM(2005)118].
European Commission, 2005b. Proposal for a Decision of the European Parliament and of the Council concerning the seventh framework programme of the European Community for research, technological development and demonstration activities (2007 to 2013) [COM(2005) 440].
European Council. 81/1032/EEC: Council Decision of 7 December 1981 adopting a multi-annual research and training programme for the European Economic Community in the field of biomolecular engineering. Official Journal L375 12 (1981) 0001-0004
European Science Social Forum Network, 2005. Framework programme 7: towards a real partnership with society?
FAO, 2004. The state of food and agriculture: Biotechnology: meeting the needs of the poor? FAO Agriculture Series No. 35, ISSN 0081-4539.
FAO, 2007. International Conference on Organic Agriculture and Food Security, Rome, 03-05, May 2007.
Food Ethic Council, 2004. Just knowledge? Governing research on food and farming. Available on http://www.foodethicscouncil.org.
Friedmann H. From colonialism to green capitalism: social movements and emergence of food regimes, new directions in the sociology of global development. Research in Rural Sociology and Development 11 (2005) 229-267
Geels F.W. Technological transitions as evolutionary reconfiguration processes: a multi-level perspective and a case study. Research Policy 31 (2002) 1257-1274
Geels F.W. From sectoral systems of innovation to socio-technical systems: Insights about dynamics and change from sociology and institutional theory. Research Policy 33 (2004) 897-920
Goodman D., and Watts M. Globalising Food: Agrarian Questions and Global Restructuring (1997), Routledge, London
Graff G.D. The division of innovative labor among universities, entrepreneurs, and corporations in generating the technological trajectories of agricultural biotechnology. Paper prepared for Center for Intellectual Property Symposium 2004. Sweden, June 1-3 (2004)
Graff G.D., Cullen S.E., Bradford K.J., Zilberman D., and Bennett A.B. The public-private structure of intellectual property ownership in agricultural biotechnology. Nature Biotechnology 21 (2003) 989-995
Guthman J. Raising organic: an agro-ecological assessment of grower practices in California. Agriculture and Human Values 17 (2000) 257-266
Hayami Y., and Ruttan V.W. Agricultural Development: An International Perspective (1985), Johns Hopkins University Press, Baltimore
Heisey P.W., King J.L., and Rubenstein K.D. Patterns of public-sector and private-sector patenting in agricultural biotechnology. AgBioForum 8 2-3 (2005) (Article 3)
Hess C.E. Resource allocation to state agbiotech research: 1982-1988. Bio/Technology 9 (1991) 29-31
Hubbell B.J., and Welsh R. Transgenic crops: engineering a more sustainable agriculture?. Agriculture and Human Values 15 (1998) 43-56
IAASTD, 2008. Executive Summary of the Synthesis Report of the International Assessment of Agricultural Knowledge, Science and Technology for Development (IAASTD). Available on http://www.agassessment.org.
Information Systems for Biotechnology, 2006. Field Test Releases in the U.S. (Database).
IPCC, 2007. IPCC Fourth Assessment Report: Climate Change 2007. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
The International Commission on the Future of Food and Agriculture. Manifesto on the Future of Food (2003, July 15), San Rossore, Italy
James, C., 2007. Global Status of Commercialized Biotech/GM Crops: 2007. ISAAA Briefs No. 37. ISAAA, Ithaca, NY.
Jasanoff S. The Fifth Branch: Science Advisers as Policymakers (1990), Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA (reprint edition (1998))
Joly P.B., and Lemari S. The technological trajectories of the agrochemical industry: change and continuity. Science and Public Policy 29 (2004) 259-266
Kirschenmann F. Designing a new generation of biodiversity for agro-ecosystems of the future. Agronomy Journal 99 (2007) 373-376
Kuc J. Concepts and direction of induced systemic resistance in plants and its application. European Journal of Plant Pathology 107 (2001) 7-12
Kuhn T.S. The Structure of Scientific Revolutions (1962), Chicago University Press, Chicago
Lacey H. Is Science Value Free? Values and Scientific Understanding (1999), Routledge, London
Lacey H. Assessing the value of transgenic crops. Science and Engineering Ethics 8 (2002) 497-511
Lang T., and Heasman M. Food wars: Public Health and the Battle for Mouths Minds and Markets (2004), Earthscan, London p. 224
Levie A., Legrand M.A., Dogot P., Pels C., Baret P.V., and Hance T. Mass releases of Aphidius rhopalosiphi and strip management to control of wheat aphids. Agriculture Ecosystems & Environment 105 (2005) 17-21
Levidow L., Søgaard V., and Carr S. Agricultural public-sector research establishments in Western Europe: research priorities in conflict. Science and Public Policy 29 (2004) 287-295
Levidow L., and Boschert K. Coexistence or contradiction? GM crops versus alternative agricultures in Europe. Geoforum 39 1 (2008) 174-190
Liang W. Farming systems as an approach to agro-ecological engineering. Ecological Engineering 11 (1998) 27-35
Liebowitz S.J., and Margolis S.E. Path dependence, lock-in, and history. Journal of Law, Economics and Organization 11 (1995) 205-226
Lundvall B.A. National Systems of Innovation: Towards a Theory of Innovation and Interactive Learning (1992), Pinter, London
Marechal, K., Aubaret-Joachain, H., Ledant, J.-P., 2008. The influence of economics on agricultural systems: an evolutionary and ecological perspective. Centre Emile Bernheim (Solvay Business School) Working Paper (08/028).
Marsden T., and Sonnino R. Rural food and agri-food governance in Europe: tracing the development of alternatives. In: Higgins V., and Lawrence G. (Eds). Agricultural Governance: Globalization and the New Politics of Regulation (2005), Routledge, London
McMillan G.S., Narin F., and Deeds D.L. An analysis of the critical role of public science in innovation: the case of biotechnology. Research Policy 29 (2000) 1-8
Mignot, J.-P., Poncet, C., 2001. The industrialization of knowledge in life sciences: convergence between public research policies and industrial strategies. Cahiers de recherche du Creden 20/1/2001.
Millennium Ecosystem Assessment. Ecosystems and Human Well-Being: Global Assessment Reports (2005), Island Press, Washington, DC
Morgan K., Marsden T., and Murdoch J. Worlds of Food, Place, Power, and Provenance in the Food Chain (2006), Oxford University Press, Oxford
National Research Council, 1987. Agricultural Biotechnology: Strategies for National Competitiveness. Report of the Committee on a National Strategy for Biotechnology in Agriculture.
National Research Council, 1998. Designing an Agricultural Genome Program. Report of the Board on Biology and Board on Agriculture. The National Academy Press, Washington, DC.
National Research Council, 2002. Publicly Funded Agricultural Research and the Changing Structure of US Agriculture. Report. Board on Agriculture and Natural Resources.
Nelson R.R. National Systems of Innovation: A Comparative Study (1993), Oxford University Press, Oxford
Nelson R., and Winter S.G. An Evolutionary Theory of Economic Change (1982), Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA
Nissani M. Ten cheers for interdisciplinarity: The case for interdisciplinary knowledge and research. The Social Science Journal 34 (1997) 201-216
OECD, 2006. Agricultural Policies in OECD Countries at a Glance, 2006 ed.
Orsenigo L. The Emergence of Biotechnology (1989), Pinter, London
Parayil G. Mapping technological trajectories of the Green Revolution and the Gene Revolution from modernization to globalization. Research Policy 32 (2003) 971-990
Pardey, P.G., Beintema, N.M., 2001. Slow Magic Agricultural: R&D a Century After Mendel. Agricultural Science and Technology Indicators Initiative. International Food Policy Research Institute Report.
Parrott N., and Marsden T. The Real Green revolution: Organic and agroecological farming in the South. Greenpeace Environmental Trust (2002), Canonbury Villas, London
Patel R. Stuffed and starved. Markets, Power and the Hidden Battle for the World Food System (2007), Portobello Books Ltd., London
Pestre D. Regime of knowledge production in society: towards a more political and social reading. Minerva 41 3 (2003) 245-261
Pew Initiative on Food and Biotechnology, 2003. University-Industry Relationships: Framing the Issues for Academic research in Agricultural Biotechnology. AgbioForum 8 (2-3), November 19-20, 2002.
Possas M.L., Salles S., and de Silveira J.M. An evolutionary approach to technological innovation in agriculture: some preliminary remarks. Research Policy 25 (1996) 933-945
Pretty J.N., Morison J.I.L., and Hine R.E. Reducing food poverty by increasing agricultural sustainability in developing countries. Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment 95 (2003) 217-234
Reiss, T., Strobel, O., 2003. State of the Art Report Life Sciences (Annex 3), Integrating Technological and Social Aspects of Foresight in Europe (ITSAFE).
Royal Society, US National Academy of Sciences, Brazilian Academy of Sciences, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Indian National Science Academy, Mexican Academy of Sciences, Third World Academy of Sciences, 2000. Tsransgenic plants and world agriculture.
Russel A. Biotechnology as a technological paradigm in the global knowledge structure. Technology Analysis & Strategic Management 11 (1999) 235-254
SAFE, 2005. Silvoarable Agroforestry For Europe (SAFE). Project Final Progress Report. Available on http://www.montpellier.inra.fr/safe.
Slaughter S., and Leslie L.L. Academic Capitalism: Politics, Policies and the Entrepreneurial University (1997), John Hopkins University Press, Baltimore, ML
Staver C., Guharay F., Monterroso D., and Muschler R.G. Designing pest-suppressive multistrata perennial crop systems: shade-grown coffee in Central America. Agroforestry Systems 53 (2001) 151-170
Stirling A. Risk at a turning point?. Journal of Environmental Medicine 1 (1999) 119-126
Strategy Unit of the Cabinet Office. Weighing Up the Costs and Benefits of GM Crops (2003)
Sunding D., and Zilberman D. The agricultural innovation process: research and technology adoption in a changing agricultural sector. In: Gardner B.L., and Rausser G.C. (Eds). Handbooks of Agricultural Economics vol. 1A (2001), Elsevier
Tait, J., Chataway, J., Wield, D., 2001. PITA Project: Policy Influences on Technology for Agriculture: Chemicals, Biotechnology and Seeds. Final Report. January 2001.
The New York Times, 2008. Online archives. Available on http://www.nytimes.com/Accessed on August 12th, 2008.
Union of Concerned Scientists, 1996. On Research for Sustainable Agriculture. Testimony before the Subcommittee on Resource Conservation, Research and Forestry, US House of Representatives Committee on Agriculture.
United Nations Development Programme, 2001. Human Development Report (2001) Making New Technologies Work for Human Development.
Unruh G.C. Understanding carbon lock-in. Energy Policy 12 (2000) 817-830
Uphoff N. Agroecological innovations: increasing food production with participatory development (2002), Earthscan Publications, London, UK
Vallavieille-Pope C. Management of disease resistance diversity of cultivars of a species in single fields: controlling epidemics. Comptes Rendus Biologies 327 (2004) 611-620
Vanloqueren G., and Baret P.V. Why are ecological, low-input, multi-resistant wheat cultivars slow to develop commercially? A Belgian agricultural 'lock-in' case study. Ecological Economics 66 (2008) 436-446
Vanloqueren, G., Baret, P.V., 2004. Les pommiers transgéniques résistants à la tavelure - Analyse systémique d'une plante transgénique de 'seconde génération' (Transgenic scab-resistant apple trees: A systems approach to a 'second-generation' transgenic plant). Le Courrier de l'Environnement de l'INRA 52, 5-20.
Weiner J. Ecology-the science of agriculture in the 21st century. Journal of Agricultural Science 141 (2003) 371-377
Whatmore S., and Stassart P. Guest editorial: what's alternative about alternative food networks?. Environment and Planning A 35 (2003) 389-391
Wolfe M.S. Crop strength through diversity. Nature 406 (2000) 681-682
Wilson C., and Tisdell C. Why farmers continue to use pesticides despite environmental, health and sustainability costs. Ecological Economics 39 3 (2001) 449-462
Xia Y., and Buccola S. University Life Science Programs and Agricultural Biotechnology. American Journal of Agricultural Economics 87 (2005) 287-293
Yan J.S., and Zhang J.S. Advances of ecological engineering in China. Ecological Engineering 2 (1993) 193-215
Zhu Y.Y., Chen H.R., Fan J.H., Wang Y.Y., Li Y., Chen J.B., Fan J.X., Yang S.S., Hu L.P., Leung H., et al. Genetic diversity and disease control in rice. Nature 406 (2000) 718-722