Evolving trends in Latin American regimes of science, technology and innovation: the politics of the “GM soya model” in Argentina

Our interest is to understand the challenges to modern (national) science and innovation regimes under conditions of globalization and “multiple modernities” (Eisenstadt 2000). Different scholarly attention has been paid to existing institutions that may no longer be adequate to address those challenges. This may be because modern institutions are pressured for a greater reflexive opening up of their structures (Beck and Lau 2005) or because the modern world-system is facing severe turbulences that would ultimately lead to a time of structural dissolution (Wallerstein 2005). This renders interesting to trace the responses to these challenges, and we suggest to do it in the field of science, technology and society, one where we can make a contribution. Unlike many studies mainly focusing on European models and regimes, our ongoing multi-level comparative research takes Latin American countries as an entrance point to finding responses that are different from those occuring in European countries. Latin American countries are interesting to study in this respect because institutions of science and technology have not been set up in the same way as in Europe and the governance patterns have been different.
Our presentation is based on one country, Argentina, and focuses on one important sector: biotechnology in agriculture. Argentina is taken as a central case study because in addition of being today the second largest exportator of GM crops (behind the US and before Brasil), it has been the first country in Latin America to establish a professional regulatory framework in the early 1990s, looking at ecological, health and commercial aspects. GM soya crops is specifically analysed because of its importance — GM soya represents 60% of the cultivated areas — and its controversial aspect : the « GM soya model » is presented at the same time as an elixir for agro-industrial ills and as a techno-economic network increasing the benefits of the global North while dramatically affecting public health and the environment in Argentina. We suggest to diagnose developments and perceptions of issues related to health, economy, ecological diversity, fertility of soils, regulation and intellectual property. Our methodology favours qualitative data collection (individual interviews with key actors of science and innovation) and analysis, while using quantitative data when available and relevant.