Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 29 (5):787-811 (2016)
Abstract |
The Svalbard Global Seed Vault provides a backup of seed collections from genebanks around the world. It’s unique character has made it iconic in the public imagination as a ‘Noah’s Ark’ for crop plants. Its remote location and strict controls on access have, however, also lent it an air of mystery, swirling with conspiracy theories. In this paper, I first clarify the aims of the Vault, the history of its development and the policies and practices of its current operation. Given concerns around its potential links to the biotechnology industry, I go on to ask whether GM crops are currently stored in the Vault. Presenting several reasons for why GM crops are formally excluded, while indicating the potential for both change and unintentional contamination, I am compelled to question whether GM crops should be excluded. Answering this requires an interrogation of their potential conservation value as modern contributors to crop biodiversity. In exploring this issue, I suggest that there has been surprisingly little discussion of the moral status and conservation value of bio-technological crop plants and indeed, of how we care for all the techno-lifeforms we are currently engaged in co-creating. I suggest that these are becoming important issues as biotechnological techniques and applications begin to rapidly evolve and diversify. Emphasizing the scope for a refreshed interdisciplinary research agenda exploring the interface between biotechnology and biodiversity conservation, I conclude the article by proposing new concepts of synbiodiversity and symbiodiversity to encourage further debate.
|
Keywords | Biotechnology Biodiversity Conservation value GMO Seed vault New plant breeding techniques |
Categories | (categorize this paper) |
ISBN(s) | |
DOI | 10.1007/s10806-016-9634-7 |
Options |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
Download options
References found in this work BETA
Organisms ≠ Machines.Daniel J. Nicholson - 2013 - Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part C: Studies in History and Philosophy of Biological and Biomedical Sciences 44 (4):669-678.
Synthetic Biology: Drawing a Line in Darwin's Sand.Christopher J. Preston - 2008 - Environmental Values 17 (1):23-39.
The Concept of Intrinsic Value and Transgenic Animals.H. Verhoog - 1992 - Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 5 (2):147-160.
View all 13 references / Add more references
Citations of this work BETA
No citations found.
Similar books and articles
Abby Kinchy, Seeds, Science, and Struggle: The Global Politics of Transgenic Crops.Barbara Brandl - 2015 - Minerva 53 (2):189-192.
The Transatlantic Rift in Genetically Modified Food Policy.Celina Ramjoué - 2007 - Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 20 (5):419-436.
Transgenic Crops: Engineering a More Sustainable Agriculture? [REVIEW]Bryan J. Hubbell & Rick Welsh - 1998 - Agriculture and Human Values 15 (1):43-56.
GM Crops: Patently Wrong? [REVIEW]James Wilson - 2007 - Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 20 (3):261-283.
Improving Technology Delivery Mechanisms: Lessons From Bean Seed Systems Research in Eastern and Central Africa. [REVIEW]Soniia David & Louise Sperling - 1999 - Agriculture and Human Values 16 (4):381-388.
Understanding the Scope of Farmer Perceptions of Risk: Considering Farmer Opinions on the Use of Genetically Modified (Gm) Crops as a Stakeholder Voice in Policy. [REVIEW]Nicholas P. Guehlstorf - 2008 - Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 21 (6):541-558.
Climate-Ready GM Crops, Intellectual Property and Global Justice.Cristian Timmermann, Henk van den Belt & Michiel Korthals - 2010 - In Carlos Maria Romeo Casabona, Leire Escajedo San Epifanio & Aitziber Emaldi Cirión (eds.), Global food security: ethical and legal challenges. Wageningen Academic Publishers. pp. 153-158.
GM Crops, the Hubris Argument and the Nature of Agriculture.Payam Moula - 2015 - Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 28 (1):161-177.
Debates on Genetically Modified Crops in the Context of Sustainable Development.Ksenia Gerasimova - 2016 - Science and Engineering Ethics 22 (2):525-547.
A Quantitative Safety Assessment Model for Transgenic Protein Products Produced in Agricultural Crops.John A. Howard & Kirby C. Donnelly - 2004 - Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 17 (6):545-558.
Conservation of Biodiversity Within Canadian Agricultural Landscapes: Integrating Habitat for Wildlife. [REVIEW]Pierre Mineau & Alison McLaughlin - 1996 - Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 9 (2):93-113.
Crop Diversification and Trade Liberalization: Linking Global Trade and Local Management Through a Regional Case Study. [REVIEW]Evan D. G. Fraser - 2006 - Agriculture and Human Values 23 (3):271-281.
Ethical Considerations at the Various Stages in the Development, Production, and Consumption of GM Crops.Michael J. Reiss - 2001 - Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 14 (2):179-190.
Assessing the Value of Transgenic Crops.Hugh Lacey - 2002 - Science and Engineering Ethics 8 (4):497-511.
Analytics
Added to PP index
2016-09-14
Total views
12 ( #812,339 of 2,517,879 )
Recent downloads (6 months)
1 ( #409,482 of 2,517,879 )
2016-09-14
Total views
12 ( #812,339 of 2,517,879 )
Recent downloads (6 months)
1 ( #409,482 of 2,517,879 )
How can I increase my downloads?
Downloads