THE ROLE OF BIOTECHNOLOGY IN A SUSTAINABLE FOOD SUPPLYassets.cambridge.org/97805211/92347/frontmatter/... · 2012. 1. 21. · widespread use of biotechnology in the food supply. This

www.cambridge.org© in this web service Cambridge University Press

Cambridge University Press978-0-521-19234-7 - The Role of Biotechnology in a Sustainable Food Supply Edited by Jennie S. Popp, Molly M. Jahn, Marty D. Matlock and Nathan P. KemperFrontmatterMore information

THE ROLE OF BIOTECHNOLOGY IN ASUSTAINABLE FOOD SUPPLY

One of the main challenges of our generation is the creation of an efficient system that providessustainable food, feed, fiber, and fuel from the land while also preserving biodiversity andecosystems. The first and most immediate challenge will be to feed a human population thatis expected to grow to more than nine billion by mid-century. The supply of food must growat least as fast as the population, but the amount of land and water available for agricultureis limited; thus the need for more food must be met through higher crop yields. Agriculturalbiotechnology is one tool that holds promise to alleviate hunger and poverty. However, thereare complex and interrelated scientific, social, political, and ethical questions regarding thewidespread use of biotechnology in the food supply.

This edited volume – which includes contributions from leading scholars in many fields –discusses the numerous factors in the use of agricultural and food biotechnology as we worktoward more sustainable food production systems. It includes diverse perspectives on thechallenges, opportunities, success stories, barriers, and risks associated with biotechnology. Itsummarizes additional studies on the effects of biotechnology on the environment. The bookalso discusses relevant ethical and moral issues, potential changes to government policies andeconomics, and other social implications of agricultural biotechnology.

This comprehensive and interdisciplinary book will be of great interest to students, profes-sionals, and researchers in various fields – from bioengineering, agriculture, and ecosystemscience, to economics and political science.

jennie s. popp is a Professor of Agricultural Economics and Agribusiness and Area Directorof the Center for Agricultural and Rural Sustainability at the University of Arkansas. Herresearch areas include the economics of water and soil quality, risk management for agriculturalproducers, and assessment of best management practices for agriculture.

molly m. jahn is a Professor in the Laboratory of Genetics and Department of Agronomyat the University of Madison–Wisconsin. She has had a distinguished research career in plantgenetics and genomics and plant breeding of vegetable crops, focusing on the moleculargenetics of disease resistance and quality traits.

marty d. matlock is a Professor of Biological and Agricultural Engineering and AreaDirector of the Center for Agricultural and Rural Sustainability at the University of Arkansas.He is a Certified Senior Ecologist with the Ecological Society of America and a RegisteredProfessional Engineer. His research area is in the design and management of ecosystemservices, with a focus on water resources.

nathan p. kemper is the Trade Adjustment Assistance Program Coordinator for the SouthernRisk Management Education Center. He coordinates the efforts of a team made up of Cooper-ative Extension Service and Sea Grant faculty and staff and industry representatives in thirteensouthern region states to develop curricula and deliver training to farmers and fishermen tohelp them adjust their business practices in response to increased import competition.

http://www.cambridge.org/9780521192347

http://www.cambridge.org




This book is dedicated to our families and to the men, women, andchildren who toil every day in the sun and rain to produce the food,

feed, fiber, and fuel that drive our prosperity.






THE ROLE OF BIOTECHNOLOGY IN ASUSTAINABLE FOOD SUPPLY

Edited by

JENNIE S. POPPUniversity of Arkansas

MOLLY M. JAHNUniversity of Wisconsin–Madison

MARTY D. MATLOCKUniversity of Arkansas

NATHAN P. KEMPERUniversity of Arkansas






cambridge university pressCambridge, New York, Melbourne, Madrid, Cape Town,

Singapore, Sao Paulo, Delhi, Mexico City

Cambridge University Press32 Avenue of the Americas, New York, NY 10013-2473, USA

www.cambridge.orgInformation on this title: www.cambridge.org/9780521192347

C© Cambridge University Press 2012

This publication is in copyright. Subject to statutory exceptionand to the provisions of relevant collective licensing agreements,no reproduction of any part may take place without the written

permission of Cambridge University Press.

First published 2012

Printed in the United States of America

A catalog record for this publication is available from the British Library.

Library of Congress Cataloging in Publication data

The role of biotechnology in a sustainable food supply / [edited by] Jennie Popp . . . [et al.].p. cm.

Includes bibliographical references and index.ISBN 978-0-521-19234-7 (hardback)

1. Food – Biotechnology. 2. Food – Supply. I. Popp, Jennie, 1966–TP248.65.F66R64 2012

664–dc23 2011037256

ISBN 978-0-521-19234-7 Hardback

Cambridge University Press has no responsibility for the persistence oraccuracy of URLs for external or third-party Internet Web sites referred to in this publication anddoes not guarantee that any content on such Web sites is, or will remain, accurate or appropriate.






Contents

Preface page xiEditors xiiiContributing Authors xivAbbreviations xix

1 World Population Growth and Food Supply 1William H. Meyers and Nicholas KalaitzandonakesPopulation Growth Dynamics and Projections to 2050 3Potential Income and Demand Growth 5Supply Projections for Cereals from Different Sources 7Prices Matter Too 12Conclusions and Implications 13

2 Social Challenges: Public Opinion and Agricultural Biotechnology 17Dominique BrossardUsing Genetically Engineered Crops in Food Production: Pro and Con

Arguments 18Macro-Level Challenges: The Sociopolitical Context 19Public Opinion about GE Crops Worldwide 22

European Attitudes 24African Attitudes 24Asian Attitudes 25

Understanding Public Opinion Dynamics 26Conclusion 28

3 Loving Biotechnology: Ethical Considerations 32The Rev. Lowell E. GrishamThe Christian Ethic Celebrates Discovery 33

Responsibility toward Our Neighbor 34Responsibility for Creation 35Other Faith Traditions’ Attitudes toward Earth 37

v






vi Contents

Stewardship, Trust, and Responsibility 37Giving Voice to Stakeholders 38Openness and Trust as Process 41The Ethic of Development 43Model: Three Cups of Tea 45

4 Biotechnology in Crop Production 49Eric S. SachsThe Demand for More Food, Feed, Fuel, and Fiber 50

Population Growth, Food Prices, Hunger, and EnvironmentalDegradation 52

The Role of Technology and Innovation 54Sustainable Development in Agriculture 54

The Principal Tools 55Advanced Agronomic Practices 56Modern Breeding and Germplasm Improvement 57Genetic Engineering 58

Biotechnology Adoption and Trait Stacking: The Global Adoption andExpansion of GM Crops 63

Impacts of GM Crops 64Yield and Productivity 64Environment 65Economy 67

Challenges to GM Crops 69Potential for Health and Environmental Risks 69Risk Assessment, Regulation, and Policy 69Misleading Information and Fear 70

The Path Forward 71

5 Biotechnology and the Control of Viral Diseases of Crops 77Jason R. Cavatorta, Stewart M. Gray, and Molly M. JahnHost Plant Resistance 78

Host Plant Resistance as a Sustainable Alternative 78Host Plant Resistance through Conventional Breeding 79Host Plant Resistance through Genetic Engineering 79

Genomics of Virus Resistance 80Dominantly Inherited Virus Resistance 80Recessively Inherited Virus Resistance 81

Eukaryotic Translation Initiation Factor 4E 82Detailed Understanding of a Recessive Virus Resistance

Gene 82Transgenesis of eIF4E Controls Virus Infection 82Intragenic Virus Resistance in Potato 84

Consumer Acceptance Issues 84Conclusion 85






Contents vii

6 Animal Biotechnologies and Agricultural Sustainability 90Alison Van Eenennaam and William MuirWhat Is Animal Biotechnology? 93Genetic Engineering 95

Potential Benefits 95Concerns 99

Cloning 102Potential Benefits 103Concerns 104

Genomic Selection 105Potential Benefits 106Concerns 107

Functional Genomics 107Potential Benefits 108Concerns 110

Other Biotechnologies 110RNAi 110Modification of Rumen Microorganisms 111Recombinant Bovine Somatotropin 111

Conclusion 112

7 Genetically Engineered Crops Can Be Part of a Sustainable Food Supply:Food and Food Safety Issues 122Peggy G. LemauxWill Introducing Fish Genes into Strawberries Result in Health Risks? 122Can GE Foods Have Nutritional Differences That Cause Health

Risks? 123Does a Lack of GE Food Labeling Raise Risks for Human Consumption? 124Did People Die after Consuming the Nutritional Supplement Tryptophan? 124Were Potatoes Engineered to Produce a Lectin Unsafe to Eat? 125Have Any Food Safety Studies Been Done on GE Foods? 125Does the Transgene DNA in Foods Cause Safety Problems? 126Can Eating Bt Protein Cause Food Safety Issues for Consumers? 127Are Allergens Being Introduced into GE Foods? 129Were Foods with Bt Corn Removed from the Market due to Safety

Concerns? 129Can GE Crops Engineered to Make Pharmaceuticals Contaminate Foods? 130Are GE Foods 100 Percent Safe? 131Are Organic Foods Safer and Healthier than Those Grown

Conventionally? 132What Complexities Do Future GE Trait Introductions Present? 133Conclusion 134Acknowledgments 134






viii Contents

8 Ecological Considerations in Biotechnology: Ecological Concerns andEnvironmental Risks of Transgenic Crops 141Mark K. Sears and Jeffrey D. WoltGenetically Engineered Products Now and in the Future 141

Glyphosate- and Gluphosinate-Tolerant Maize, Soybeans, and Canola 141Bt Protein (Insecticide) Expressing Maize, Cotton, and Potatoes 142Virus Resistance in Papaya and Squash 143Future Crop Enhancements from GE Technology: Herbicide Tolerance

and Bt Protein in Rice 143Fruit and Vegetable Pest Resistance 144Future Plant Traits Derived from GE Technology 144Animal Traits Derived from GE Technology 145

Ecological Concerns Related to Transgenic Organisms 145Unintended Impacts 145Resistance of Target Populations 146Persistence and Escape (Weediness) of Transformed Plant 146Persistence in the Environment of Products from Transgenes 146Transfer of Genetic Material to Related Species in Habitat 147

Environmental Risk Assessment (ERA) Principles 147The Risk Assessment Process 148

Problem Formulation 148Effects Characterization 148Exposure Characterization 148Risk Characterization 148

An Iterative, Tiered Approach 149Species Selection 150Study Design 150Overall Risk Assessment 150

A Case Study: Bt Maize Pollen and Monarch Butterfly Risk Assessment 151Overview 151Universality of Approach 151Paradigm Shift for Regulatory Agencies 152

Discussion Points and Further Needs 152Evaluation of Strong/Weak Points of the Bt Maize: Monarch Case 152Outcomes of Risk Assessment Process Relative to Regulation and

Introduction of Genetically Engineered Crop Plants or Livestock 152Scale of Economy for Biotechnology Research and Development 153

9 Organic Agriculture as an Alternative to a GE-Based System 159Erin SilvaCan Organic Agriculture Feed the World? 160Organic Agriculture as Part of a Sustainable Agriculture Model 164

Impact of Organic Agriculture on Sustaining Ecological Health 164Impact of Organic Agriculture on Sustaining Human Health 167






Contents ix

Breeding for Organic Agriculture: An Alternative to GMO-BasedBreeding Technology 168

Participatory Plant Breeding 170Participatory Plant Breeding Case Study: The Organic Seed Partnership 172

Conclusion 173

10 A Case Study of Rice from Traditional Breeding to Genomics:Rice – Food for the Gods 180Pamela RonaldWhen and Where Did Farmers First Start Growing Rice? 181The Green Revolution 182Efforts to Develop Rice Varieties That Are Genetically Diverse,

Are Locally Adapted, and Require Fewer Inputs 184What We Are Learning Today: Discovering the Hidden Gems 186Bio-Fortified 189Conclusion 190

11 Case Study: Healthy Grown Potatoes and Sustainability of WisconsinPotato Production 192Alvin J. Bussan, Deana Knuteson, Jed Colquhoun, Larry Binning, Shelley Jansky,Jiming Jiang, Paul D. Mitchell, Walter R. Stevenson, Russell Groves, Jeff Wyman,Matt Ruark, and Keith KellingStandards of Practice for Healthy Grown Potatoes 193Data Collection and Management 196Healthy Grown Adoption 197

Healthy Grown Performance Metrics 198Costs of the Healthy Grown Program 199Market Challenges for Healthy Grown Potatoes 204

Value of Biotechnology to the Healthy Grown Potato Program 205Summary 207

12 Precautionary Practice of Risk Assessment 212Caroline (Cal) Baier-Anderson and Michelle Mauthe HarveyUnderstanding the Precautionary Principle 213Risk Assessment Contexts 214How Much Is Too Much? 215Drawing the Line 216Integrating the Precautionary Principle and Risk Assessment 217Integrating Precaution into Risk-Based Approaches 218A Matter of Timing 219

13 Risk Assessment Approaches and Implications 223Jose Falck-Zepeda and Anthony J. CavalieriGE Crops as Part of a Sustainable Food Supply 223

Emergence of Public Sector Research to Develop GE Crops 224






x Contents

Meeting the Needs for a Sustainable Food Supply: The Importance ofRisk Assessment and Regulation of GE Crops 224

Use of Global Regulatory Experience with GE Crops 225Technical Improvements in GE: Opportunities for Standardized

Approaches 225Gene Discovery, More Valuable Traits, and Regulatory Evaluation 227Nutritional Improvements: Allergenicity, Toxicology, and Other Food

Safety Issues 228Environmental Assessments and Long-Term Ecological Evaluation

(Modeling) 229Cost of Compliance with Biosafety Regulation 231Biosafety Regulatory Systems for the Developing World: A Growing

Divide? 234Conclusion 236

14 The Context for Biotechnology in Sustainable Agriculture 239Marty D. MatlockGlobal Population Dynamics and Agricultural Production 240Increasing Demands for Agricultural Products 242Land Use Pressures 246Water Resource Demands 248Conclusion 249

15 Agricultural Biotechnology: Equity and Prosperity 252Gregory D. Graff and David ZilbermanThe Impacts of Transgenic Crops: Lessons of First-Generation Traits 253

Impacts Depend on Preexisting Practices and Conditions 254Impacts Are Stochastic in Nature 254Impacts Can Be Nonpecuniary – Convenience and Time Savings 254Impacts Can Be Indirect – Reduced Fusarium Infestation 255Impacts Are Scale-Neutral 255No Evidence of Harm Even after Extensive Use 255Incentives to Avoid Yield Drag Will Help Maintain Crop Biodiversity 256Managing Resistance 257Some Positive Environmental Impacts 257The Unrealized Potential of First-Generation Traits 257

Reassessment of Biotechnology for Future Applications 258Agricultural Biotechnology and Energy Prices 258Second-Generation Traits 259

Shaping Policies for Sustainability 261Regulatory Requirements 261Intellectual Property Rights 262Conclusion 264

Index 267






Preface

The conference that formed the foundation of this book occurred in the formative stageof the debate over the role of biotechnology in providing a sustainable food supply. Inthe years since the conference very significant progress has occurred in the framing ofthe issues presented in this book. A vibrant discourse across governmental, academic,industrial, and public stakeholders has emerged pertaining to a shared commitmenttoward a healthy, vibrant, prosperous future for humanity and our planet.

There is clear common agreement that making the best use of our natural resourcesis good. Almost everyone understands at some level that we live in a finite Earthsystem that is very complex and interconnected. There is also a new recognition thatit is possible for our activities to exert influences on that system for better or for worse.This recognition has resulted in widespread commitments in global business commu-nities and local governments toward efficiencies and responsibilities previously notconsidered part of commerce. The emerging measurements of associated co-benefitsand inadvertent damages from our agricultural supply chain are resulting in detailed,holistic, cradle-to-grave or field-to-compost characterization of those supply chains.These approaches recognize the now familiar triple bottom line. Nobody wants to dothings that harm the environment or communities, human or other biota, and almosteveryone understands that sustainability requires optimizing across complex domainsand identifying trade-offs and synergies.

The role of technology in human life has throughout history created complexityand uncertainty where before there was a certain level of comfort. We have time andtime again adopted a technology to solve a problem, only to create another, sometimesmuch more threatening, situation. These new problems can be eminently predictableif we take the time to look. The editors of this book are cognizant of the risks ofbiotechnology in the food supply chain and have attempted to ensure that credibleand reasonable risks are described herein.

But our progress to date has brought us to the brink of some important abysses. Thenumber of people who are chronically malnourished is on the rise. Inputs required to

xi






xii Preface

produce food, feed, fiber, and fuel from the land are becoming more scarce, as is theland itself. Population pressures will generate demand from this finite Earth in excessof any experienced in history. Other life forms hang in the balance. Our global lifesupport system is at risk.

We have experienced these brinks in the past. After a devastating Civil War, Pres-ident Lincoln explicitly set our course toward a plentiful, affordable, and safe foodsupply by creating ingenious programs in education and technology development. Inthe ensuing century and a half we have made almost unimaginable progress towardhis goal with consequent benefits of equally unimaginable proportions.

Our 21st-century challenge is to create a system that provides sustainable food,feed, fiber, and fuel from the land while preserving biodiversity and other ecosystemservices. The editors believe that the way to approach this new brink, this 21st-Century Agricultural Challenge, is through respectful discourse so that we may betterunderstand each other’s values. This discourse should inform science-based analysisof risks and opportunities. Respect and trust come from understanding each other’svalues, though they differ across communities. Respectful discourse to align valueswith competing demands and uncertain outcomes will, in the editors’ views, createour best opportunity to achieve the imaginable – a prosperous Earth for more thannine billion people.






Editors

Jennie S. Popp, Ph.D.Professor, Department of Agricultural Economics and AgribusinessArea Director, Center for Agricultural and Rural SustainabilityUniversity of Arkansas–FayettevilleFayetteville, AR

Molly M. Jahn, Ph.D.Professor, Departments of Agronomy and GeneticsUniversity of Wisconsin–MadisonMadison, WI

Marty D. Matlock, Ph.D., P.E., C.S.E.Professor, Department of Biological and Agricultural EngineeringArea Director, Center for Agricultural and Rural SustainabilityUniversity of Arkansas–FayettevilleFayetteville, AR

Nathan P. KemperTrade Adjustment Assistance Program CoordinatorSouthern Risk Management Education CenterUniversity of Arkansas Division of AgricultureLittle Rock, AR

xiii






Contributing Authors

Caroline (Cal) Baier-Anderson, Ph.D.Former Scientist with Environmental Defense FundWashington, DC

Larry Binning, Ph.D.Professor EmeritusDepartment of HorticultureUniversity of Wisconsin–MadisonMadison, WI

Dominique Brossard, Ph.D.Associate ProfessorDepartment of Life Sciences CommunicationUniversity of Wisconsin–MadisonMadison, WI

Alvin J. Bussan, Ph.D.Associate ProfessorDepartment of HorticultureUniversity of Wisconsin–MadisonMadison, WI

Anthony J. Cavalieri, Ph.D.ConsultantInternational Food Policy Research InstituteWashington, DC

xiv






Contributing Authors xv

Jason R. Cavatorta, Ph.D.Plant BreederVegetable Seeds DivisionMonsanto CompanyWoodland, CA

Jed Colquhoun, Ph.D.Associate ProfessorDepartment of HorticultureUniversity of Wisconsin–MadisonMadison, WI

Jose Falck-Zepeda, Ph.D.Research Fellow/Leader, Policy Team Program for Biosafety SystemsEnvironment and Production Technology DivisionInternational Food Policy Research InstituteWashington, DC

Gregory D. Graff, Ph.D.Associate ProfessorDepartment of Agricultural and Resource EconomicsColorado State UniversityFort Collins, CO

Stewart M. Gray, Ph.D.Research Plant Pathologist, USDA/ARSProfessor, Department of Plant Pathology and Plant-Microbe BiologyCornell UniversityIthaca, NY

The Rev. Lowell E. Grisham, M. Div.RectorSt. Paul’s Episcopal ChurchFayetteville, AR

Russell Groves, Ph.D.Assistant ProfessorDepartment of EntomologyUniversity of Wisconsin–MadisonMadison, WI






xvi Contributing Authors

Michelle Mauthe Harvey, M.B.A.Project Manager, Corporate PartnershipsEnvironmental Defense FundBentonville, AR

Molly M. Jahn, Ph.D.Professor and Special Advisor to Chancellor and Provost for

Sustainability SciencesUniversity of Wisconsin–MadisonMadison, WI

Shelley Jansky, Ph.D.Research Geneticist and Associate ProfessorUSDA/ARS and Department of HorticultureUniversity of Wisconsin–MadisonMadison, WI

Jiming Jiang, Ph.D.ProfessorDepartment of HorticultureUniversity of Wisconsin–MadisonMadison, WI

Nicholas Kalaitzandonakes, Ph.D.MSMC Endowed Professor of Agribusiness StrategyDirector, Economics and Management of Agrobiotechnology CenterUniversity of MissouriColumbia, MO

Keith Kelling, Ph.D.Professor EmeritusDepartment of Soil ScienceUniversity of Wisconsin–MadisonMadison, WI

Deana Knuteson, Ph.D.BioIPM Field CoordinatorDepartment of HorticultureUniversity of Wisconsin–MadisonMadison, WI






Contributing Authors xvii

Peggy G. Lemaux, Ph.D.Cooperative Extension SpecialistDepartment of Plant and Microbial BiologyUniversity of California–BerkeleyBerkeley, CA

Marty D. Matlock, Ph.D., P.E., C.S.E.Professor, Department of Biological and Agricultural EngineeringArea Director, Center for Agricultural and Rural SustainabilityUniversity of Arkansas–FayettevilleFayetteville, AR

William H. Meyers, Ph.D.Howard Cowden Professor of Agricultural and Applied EconomicsFood and Agricultural Policy Research InstituteUniversity of MissouriColumbia, MO

Paul D. Mitchell, Ph.D.Associate ProfessorDepartment of Agricultural and Applied EconomicsUniversity of Wisconsin–MadisonMadison, WI

William Muir, Ph.D.ProfessorPULSe Molecular Evolutionary Genetics Program and Department

of Animal SciencesPurdue UniversityWest Lafayette, IN

Pamela Ronald, Ph.D.ProfessorDepartment of Plant PathologyUniversity of California–DavisDavis, CA

Matt Ruark, Ph.D.Assistant ProfessorDepartment of Soil ScienceUniversity of Wisconsin–MadisonMadison, WI

Eric S. Sachs, Ph.D.Regulatory Lead, Scientific AffairsMonsanto CompanySt. Louis, MO






xviii Contributing Authors

Mark K. Sears, Ph.D.Professor EmeritusDepartment of Environmental BiologyUniversity of GuelphGuelph, ON, Canada

Erin Silva, Ph.D.Associate ScientistDepartment of AgronomyUniversity of Wisconsin–MadisonMadison, WI

Walter R. Stevenson, Ph.D.Professor EmeritusDepartment of Plant PathologyUniversity of Wisconsin–MadisonMadison, WI

Alison Van Eenennaam, Ph.D.Extension SpecialistDepartment of Animal ScienceUniversity of California–DavisDavis, CA

Jeffrey D. Wolt, Ph.D.ProfessorDepartment of AgronomyBiosafety Institute for Genetically Modified Agricultural ProductsIowa State UniversityAmes, IA

Jeff Wyman, Ph.D.Professor EmeritusDepartment of EntomologyUniversity of Wisconsin–MadisonMadison, WI

David Zilberman, Ph.D.Professor and Robinson ChairAgricultural and Resource EconomicsUniversity of California–BerkeleyBerkeley, CA






Abbreviations

AATF African Agricultural Technology FoundationABSPII Agricultural Biotechnology Support Project IIAFIC Asian Food Information CentreAPHIS U.S. Animal and Plant Health Inspection ServiceASSOCHAM Associated Chambers of Commerce and Industry of IndiaBMP(s) Best Management Practice(s)BSE Bovine Spongiform EncephalopathyBt Bacillus thuringiensisBt Cry toxin The Protein Crystal Endotoxin produced by BtCDC Centers for Disease Control and PreventionCFA UN Comprehensive Framework for ActionCFIA Canadian Food Inspection AgencyCOMESA Common Market in East and Southern AfricaCOMEST World Commission on the Ethics of Scientific Knowledge and TechnologyCPB Cartagena Protocol on BiosafetyDALY Disability-Adjusted Life YearDHHS U.S. Department of Health and Human ServicesDNA Deoxyribonucleic AcidEC European CommissionEDF Environmental Defense FundEFSA European Food Safety AuthorityeIF4E Eukaryotic Translation Initiation FactorEMS Eosinophilia-Myalgia SyndromeEPA U.S. Environmental Protection AgencyeQTL Expression Quantitative Trait LociERA Environmental Risk AssessmentEU European UnionFAO Food and Agriculture Organization of the United NationsFAPRI Food and Agricultural Policy Research InstituteFDA U.S. Food and Drug Administration

xix






xx Abbreviations

FFDCA Federal Food Drug and Cosmetics ActΔG Genetic gainGAO U.S. Government Accountability OfficeGDP Gross domestic productGE Genetic engineering; genetically engineeredGHG Greenhouse gasGM Genetic modification; genetically modifiedGMO Genetically modified organismGRAS Generally recognized as safeHT Herbicide tolerant/ herbicide toleranceHYV High-yield varietyICCP Intergovernmental Committee for the Cartagena Protocol on BiosafetyIFAFS USDA Initiative for Future Agricultural Food SystemsIFOAM International Federation of Organic Agriculture MovementsIFPRI International Food Policy Research InstituteILSI International Life Sciences InstituteIPCC Intergovernmental Panel on Climate ChangeIPM Integrated pest managementIPPC International Plant Protection ConventionIRM Insect resistance managementIRRI International Rice Research InstituteLCA Life-cycle assessmentMBV Molecular breeding valuesMDG Millennium Development GoalsMOU MOU – Memorandum of Understanding signed by WPVGA and WWFN NitrogenNADA New Animal Drug ApplicationNB-LRR Nucleotide Binding Site Plus Leucine Rich RepeatNGO Non-governmental organizationNitrate N Nitrate NitrogenNOP USDA National Organic ProgramNOVIC Northern Organic Vegetable Improvement CooperativeNRC National Research CouncilNRF Nano risk frameworkOECD Organisation for Economic Cooperation and DevelopmentOFPA Organic Food Production ActOMB The White House’s Office of Management and BudgetOP OrganophosphatePCM Potato crop managementPDM Potato Disease Management SoftwarePERV Porcine Endogenous RetrovirusPIP Plant incorporated protectantsPIPRA Public Intellectual Property Resource for AgriculturePP Precautionary Principle






Abbreviations xxi

PPB Participatory plant breedingPRSV Papaya ringspot virusPSR Potential support ratioPVX Potato virus XPVY Potato virus YQTL Quantitative Trait LociRABESA The Regional Approaches to Biosafety and Biotechnology RegulationsRB A broad-spectrum resistance gene to late blight that was isolated from

Solanum bulbocastanumrBST Recombinant Bovine SomatotropinR&D Research and DevelopmentrDNA Recombinant Deoxyribonucleic AcidRNA Ribonucleic AcidRR Roundup Ready R©

RTM1 Restricted TEV movement 1RTM2 Restricted TEV movement 2SCNT Somatic Cell Nuclear TransferSEHN Science and Environmental Health NetworkshRNA Short Hairpin RNAsiRNA Small Interfering RNASNP Single Nucleotide PolymorphismsTEV Tobacco etch virusUN United NationsUNEP United Nations Environment ProgrammeUNFCC United Nations Framework Convention on Climate ChangeUSAID U.S. Agency for International DevelopmentUSCB U.S. Census BureauUSDA U.S. Department of AgricultureUW University of Wisconsin–MadisonVAD Vitamin A deficiencyVip protein Vegetative Insecticidal ProteinVPg Potyviral Genome-Linked ProteinWCED World Commission on Environment and DevlopmentWFR World Fertility RateWHO World Health OrganizationWISDOM Wisconsin Decision Oriented Matrix SoftwareWISP Wisconsin Irrigation Scheduling Program SoftwareWPVGA Wisconsin Potato and Vegetable Growers AssociationWWF World Wildlife Fund









Documents

THE ROLE OF BIOTECHNOLOGY IN A SUSTAINABLE FOOD SUPPLYassets.cambridge.org/97805211/92347/frontmatter/... · 2012. 1. 21. · widespread use of biotechnology in the food supply. This