Debated agronomy: public discourse and the future of biotechnology policy in Ghana.

Q1 Arts and Humanities
Global Bioethics Pub Date : 2017-02-22 eCollection Date: 2017-01-01 DOI:10.1080/11287462.2016.1261604
Joseph A Braimah, Kilian N Atuoye, Siera Vercillo, Carrie Warring, Isaac Luginaah
{"title":"Debated agronomy: public discourse and the future of biotechnology policy in Ghana.","authors":"Joseph A Braimah,&nbsp;Kilian N Atuoye,&nbsp;Siera Vercillo,&nbsp;Carrie Warring,&nbsp;Isaac Luginaah","doi":"10.1080/11287462.2016.1261604","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>This paper examines the highly contested and ongoing biotechnology (Bt) policy-making process in Ghana. We analyse media content on how Bt is viewed in the context of Ghana's parliamentary debate on the Plant Breeders Bill and within the broader public policy-making literature. This paper does not seek to take a position on Bt or the Bill, but to understand how policy actors influence the debate with political and scientific rhetoric in Ghana. The study reveals that in the midst of scientific uncertainties of Bt's potential for sustainable agriculture production and food security, policy decisions that encourage its future adoption are heavily influenced by health, scientific, economic, environmental and political factors dictated by different ideologies, values and norms. While locally pioneered plant breeding is visible and common in the Ghanaian food chain, plant breeding/GMOs/Bt from international corporations is strongly resisted by anti-GMO coalitions. Understanding the complex and messy nature of Bt policy-making is critical for future development of agricultural technology in Ghana and elsewhere.</p>","PeriodicalId":36835,"journal":{"name":"Global Bioethics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2017-02-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/11287462.2016.1261604","citationCount":"13","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Global Bioethics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/11287462.2016.1261604","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2017/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"Arts and Humanities","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 13

Abstract

This paper examines the highly contested and ongoing biotechnology (Bt) policy-making process in Ghana. We analyse media content on how Bt is viewed in the context of Ghana's parliamentary debate on the Plant Breeders Bill and within the broader public policy-making literature. This paper does not seek to take a position on Bt or the Bill, but to understand how policy actors influence the debate with political and scientific rhetoric in Ghana. The study reveals that in the midst of scientific uncertainties of Bt's potential for sustainable agriculture production and food security, policy decisions that encourage its future adoption are heavily influenced by health, scientific, economic, environmental and political factors dictated by different ideologies, values and norms. While locally pioneered plant breeding is visible and common in the Ghanaian food chain, plant breeding/GMOs/Bt from international corporations is strongly resisted by anti-GMO coalitions. Understanding the complex and messy nature of Bt policy-making is critical for future development of agricultural technology in Ghana and elsewhere.

Abstract Image

辩论农学:加纳公共话语和生物技术政策的未来。
本文研究了加纳高度争议和正在进行的生物技术(Bt)决策过程。我们分析了在加纳议会关于植物育种者法案的辩论和更广泛的公共决策文献的背景下如何看待Bt的媒体内容。本文并不试图对Bt或该法案采取立场,而是了解政策行为者如何用政治和科学修辞影响加纳的辩论。这项研究表明,在Bt在可持续农业生产和粮食安全方面的潜力存在科学不确定性的情况下,鼓励未来采用Bt的政策决定在很大程度上受到不同意识形态、价值观和规范所决定的健康、科学、经济、环境和政治因素的影响。虽然当地的植物育种在加纳的食物链中是可见和普遍的,但来自国际公司的植物育种/转基因生物/Bt受到反转基因联盟的强烈抵制。了解Bt政策制定的复杂性和混乱性对加纳和其他地方农业技术的未来发展至关重要。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Global Bioethics
Global Bioethics Arts and Humanities-Philosophy
CiteScore
5.00
自引率
0.00%
发文量
12
审稿时长
37 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信