What farmers think about GM crops

Feb 24, 2008

Farmers are upbeat about genetically modified crops, according to new research funded by the Economic and Social Research Council (ESRC).

A group at the Open University, led by Professor Andy Lane, has taken the first systematic look at what large-scale, commodity farmers – not those mainly involved in organic growing - think about genetically-modified crops. We know how consumers, governments and the food industry regard GM, but this is the first proper look at the attitudes of the people who would use GM crops.

Lane and his colleagues found that both farmers who have been involved in GM crop trials and those who have not, regard GM as a simple extension of previous plant breeding techniques, such as those which have produced today’s established crop types. They regard GM crops as an innovation which they would assess on its merits. Their real interest is in how GM crops would work in practice and whether they can contribute to the profitability of their farms. The research suggests that these farmers do not think that GM raises any issues of principle, or that it is a matter of right or wrong.

Professor Lane said: “New technology such as GM is attractive to farmers. They want to produce high-quality food profitably and they want to farm in an environmentally sensitive way. GM may allow them to reconcile this conundrum by doing both of these things at once.”

A particular advantage of GM is its potential to allow farmers to grow crops with high yields while using less herbicide. This involves new management practices. Lane and his colleagues found that farmers who have been involved in the Farm-Scale Evaluations to assess GM in action have found GM crops feasible to grow.

The researchers also looked at how farmers learn about new developments such as GM. They found that most of the learning farmers do is informal, for example by experimentation or from their networks, which are made up from a wide range of people not necessarily just farmers. These networks can extend over long geographical distances.

Many farmers disapprove of past cuts in public funding for agricultural advisory services. It is now complicated and expensive for farmers to get good advice. They also feel that there is poor communication between farmers and people involved in agricultural policy, and between farmers and relevant scientific research.

Source: Economic & Social Research Council

Explore further: Was it unethical to hoax the world about chocolate as a weight loss 'accelerator'?

Related Stories

Why enough water will never be enough for California

May 20, 2015

These days, it seems everyone is looking for a silver bullet solution to California's drought. Some advocate increasing supply through more storage, desalination or water reuse. Others propose controlling ...

Wetlands continue to reduce nitrates

May 12, 2015

Wetlands created 20 years ago between tile-drained agricultural fields and the Embarras River were recently revisited for a new two-year University of Illinois research project. Results show an overall 62 ...

Recommended for you

Bacteria renew mystery over Chilean poet Neruda's death

May 28, 2015

Family of Chilean poet Pablo Neruda said Thursday forensic experts have found evidence of a massive bacterial infection in his remains, increasing their suspicion that he was poisoned by dictator Augusto Pinochet's regime.

User comments : 2

Adjust slider to filter visible comments by rank

Display comments: newest first

Argiod
1 / 5 (1) Feb 25, 2008
First there's genetically engineered crops. Then genetically engineered cattle. The final stop on this crazy thrill ride is genetically engineered humans. Anyone watched the movie 'Gataca' recently?
Soylent
not rated yet Apr 08, 2009
First there's genetically engineered crops. Then genetically engineered cattle. The final stop on this crazy thrill ride is genetically engineered humans. Anyone watched the movie 'Gataca' recently?


First it's anti-GM, then it's anti-pesticide and anti-fertilizer. The final stop is organic farming with deindustrialization and a population collapse.

See? I can invent ridiculous slippery slopes too.

Please sign in to add a comment. Registration is free, and takes less than a minute. Read more

Click here to reset your password.
Sign in to get notified via email when new comments are made.