Skip to main content Accessibility help
Hostname: page-component-f7d5f74f5-g4btn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2023-10-04T06:05:52.607Z Has data issue: false Feature Flags: { "corePageComponentGetUserInfoFromSharedSession": true, "coreDisableEcommerce": false, "coreDisableSocialShare": false, "coreDisableEcommerceForArticlePurchase": false, "coreDisableEcommerceForBookPurchase": false, "coreDisableEcommerceForElementPurchase": false, "coreUseNewShare": true, "useRatesEcommerce": true } hasContentIssue false

15 - How Do Socio-Political Disputes Concerning GMOs Influence Decision-Making in Developing Countries?

from Part III - Risk-Analysis-Based Regulatory Systems

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  05 July 2017

Ademola A. Adenle
Colorado State University
E. Jane Morris
University of Leeds
Denis J. Murphy
University of South Wales
Get access


The disputes that surround the possible risks of GM technology, have been the cause of considerable public concern in several countries. The advent of GM foods has resulted in different policy responses in various parts of the world and has led to trade disputes between members of the World Trade Organization. Strong consumer skepticism on genetic engineering, especially in Europe, can also affect the trading environment within which developing countries have to compete. The socio-political disputes in northern countries can significantly influence the policies on GMO issues in countries in the south. Accordingly, this study aimed to shed light on the role of national and international organizations in developing countries' choices with regard to GMOs and to propose potential solutions addressing the GMO dilemma in developing countries. The study concluded that governments and international bodies need to take the public's concerns into account when elaborating risk-related regulations and when dealing with trade disputes. It is recommended that international and appropriate non-governmental organizations that monitor agricultural policy development, evaluate the outcomes and effects of regulatory policies regarding the adoption of GM crops in developing countries.
Genetically Modified Organisms in Developing Countries
Risk Analysis and Governance
, pp. 175 - 186
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2017

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)


Adenle, A. A. (2011a). Global capture of crop biotechnology in developing world over a decade. Journal of Genetic Engineering and Biotechnology 9(2), 8395.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Adenle, A. A. (2011b). Response to issues on GM agriculture in Africa: are transgenic crops safe? BMC Research Notes 4, 388.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Adenle, A. A. (2012). Are transgenic crops safe? GM agriculture in Africa. United Nations University, Japan. [Online]. Available from
Adenle, A. A. et al. (2013). Status of development, regulation and adoption of GM agriculture in Africa: views and positions of stakeholder groups. Food Policy 43, 159166.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Adler, J. H. (2000). Cartagena Protocol: biosafe or bio-sorry? Georgetown International Environmental Law Review 761, 772.Google Scholar
Ali, A. and Abdulai, A. (2010). The adoption of genetically modified cotton and poverty reduction in Pakistan. Journal of Agricultural Economics 61(1), 175192.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ammann, K. (2014). Genomic misconception: a fresh look at the biosafety of transgenic and conventional crops. A plea for a process agnostic regulation. New Biotechnology 31(1), 117. [Online]. Available from Scholar
Azadi, H. and Ho, P. (2010). Genetically modified and organic crops in developing countries: a review of options for food security. Biotechnology Advances 28(1), 160168.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Azadi, H. et al. (2015). Genetically modified crops: towards agricultural growth, agricultural development or agricultural sustainability? Food Reviews International 31(3), 195221.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bazuin, S. et al. (2011). Application of GM crops in Sub-Saharan Africa: lessons learned from Green Revolution. Biotechnology Advances 29, 908912.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bennett, D. (2013). Brazil Says ‘Yes’ to Genetically Modified Foods. Mexico Says ‘No’. [Online]. Available from
Brookes, G. and Barfoot, P. (2016). GM crops: global socio-economic and environmental impacts 1996–2014. PG Economics Ltd, UK. [Online]. Available from
Brown-Lima, C. et al. (2012). An overview of the Brazil–China soybean trade and its strategic implications for conservation. [Online]. Available from
Carpenter, J. E. (2011). Impact of GM crops on biodiversity. GM Crops 1, 723.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
European Union Center of North Carolina (2007). Policy Area: GMOs. [Online]. Available from
FAO (2005). Public participation in decision-making regarding GMOs in developing countries: how to effectively involve rural people. Summary Document to Conference 12 of the FAO Biotechnology Forum. 17 January to 13 February 2005, Rome, Italy. [Online]. Available from
Glover, D. (2003). GMOs and the Politics of International Trade. Democratising Biotechnology. Genetically Modified Crops in Developing Countries Briefing Series. Briefing 5. Brighton: Institute of Development Studies.Google Scholar
Glowka, L. (2003). Law and modern biotechnology: selected issues of relevance to food and agriculture. FAO Legislative Study 78. [Online]. Available from
Gonzalez, X. (2009). The politics of genetically modified organisms: global rules, local needs. The University of Texas at Austin. SIT Spring class 2009. International Studies Organizations and Social Justice, 39 pp.
Gouse, M. (2012). GM maize as subsistence crop: the South African smallholder experience. AgBioForum 15(2), 163174. [Online]. Available from Scholar
Gouse, M. et al. (2006). Output and labour effects of GM maize and minimum tillage in a communal area of KwaZulu Natal. Development Perspectives 2(2), 192207.Google Scholar
Gruère, G. P. (2006). An analysis of trade related international regulations of genetically modified food and their effects on developing countries. International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI), Environment and Production Technology Division (EPT) Discussion Paper 147. Washington, D.C., 78 pp.
Gruère, G. and Sengupta, D. (2009). Biosafety decisions and perceived commercial risks. The role of GM-free private standards. Environment and Production Technology Division, The International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI) Discussion Paper 00847. [Online]. Available from
Hanrahan, C. E. (2010). Agricultural Biotechnology: The U.S.–EU Dispute. Congressional Research Service Reports. Paper 69. [Online]. Available from
ISHRW (2014). International Weed Science. [Online]. Available from
James, C. (2014). Global Status of Commercialized Biotech/GM Crops: 2014. ISAAA Brief No. 49. Ithaca, NY: ISAAA.
James, C. (2015). Global Status of Commercialized Biotech/GM Crops: 2015. ISAAA Brief 50–2015: Executive Summary. Ithaca, NY: ISAA.
Jonquieres, G. et al. (2003). Sowing discord: after Iraq, the US and Europe head for a showdown over genetically modified crops. Financial Times 14 May 2003, p. 21.
Josling, T. (2015). A review of WTO rules and GMO trade. Biotechnology 9(3). [Online]. Available from Scholar
Klümper, W. and Qaim, M. (2014). A meta-analysis of the impacts of genetically modified crops. PLoS ONE 9(11), e111629, doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0111629.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Marris, C. (2004). Issues concerning public awareness and attitudes towards genetically modified bananas and tropical fruits. Third Session of the Intergovernmental Group on Bananas and Tropical Fruits, Puerto de la Cruz, Spain, 22–26 March 2004. [Online]. Available from
Meijer, E. and Stewart, R. (2004). The GM cold war: how developing countries can go from being dominos to being players. RECIEL 13(3), 247262.Google Scholar
Nuffield Council on Bioethics (2003). Chapter 5 – Governance in the use of genetically modified crops in developing countries. A Follow-up Discussion Paper, pp. 63–82. [Online]. Available from
Paarlberg, R. (2000). Agrobiotechnology choices in developing countries. International Journal of Biotechnology 2(1–3), 167168.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Patterson, L. A. and Josling, T. (2002). Regulating biotechnology: comparing EU and US approaches. European Policy Papers #8. [Online]. Available from
Peterson, M. J. and White, P. A. (2010). The EU–US Dispute over Regulation of Genetically Modified Organisms, Plants, Feeds, and Foods. International Dimensions of Ethics Education in Science and Engineering. [Online]. Available from
Potrykus, I. (2010). Lessons from the ‘Humanitarian Golden Rice’ project: regulation prevents development of public good genetically engineered crop products. New Biotechnology 27, 466472.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Qaim, M. and Kouser, S. (2013). Genetically modified crops and food security. PLoS ONE 8(6), e64879, doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0064879.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Qaim, M., and Zilberman, D. (2003). Yield effects of genetically modified crops in developing countries. Science 299, 900902.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Reddy, P. B. et al. (2013). GM technology can solve the world food crisis. Science Secure Journal of Biotechnology 2(2), 3640.Google Scholar
Salmon, D. G. (2015). Agricultural biotechnology annual. Global Agricultural Information Network. [Online]. Available from
Tabashnik, B. E. et al. (2013). Insect resistance to Bt crops: lessons from the first billion acres. Nature Biotechnology 31(6), 510521. [Online]. Available from ScholarPubMed
Tabashnik, B. E. et al. (2015). Dual mode of action of Bt proteins: protoxin efficacy against resistant insects. Nature Scientific Reports 5, 15107. [Online]. Available from ScholarPubMed
Walia, A. (2015). Here's why 19 countries in Europe just completely banned genetically modified crops. [Online]. Available from
Wolson, R. A. (2007). Assessing the prospects for the adoption of biofortified crops in South Africa. AgBioForum 10, 184191. [Online]. Available from Scholar
Young, A. R. (2003). Political transfer and ‘trading up’? Transatlantic trade in genetically modified food and US politics. World Politics 55(4), 457484.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the or variations. ‘’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats