UK agricultural research: a different approach is urgently needed Helena Paul argues that the dominant assumptions in UK agricultural research need to be challenged, opening it up to a wide range of voices and disciplines.

Currently the power in UK agricultural The UK science establishment – include the Crop Improvement Research research lies firmly with the UK science a brief outline Club (CIRC), established in 2012. CIRC establishment and its seven research The government funds major parts of the members include Innovate UK, BASF, councils. 1 These will soon, along with UK science establishment, with a strong Syngenta and Monsanto.8 The Sustainable Innovate UK and Research England, emphasis on working with business. Of Research & Innovation Club be consolidated into ‘UK Research and the seven UK Research Councils, the (SARIC) is a joint NERC and BBSRC Innovation’.2 They fund institutions such as most obviously involved in agricultural initiative.9 Members include Syngenta, Rothamsted Research and the Open Plant research are the Biotechnology and Monsanto and Bayer. Synthetic Research Centre and Biological Sciences Research Council BBSRC also gives grants to more look to business for additional money. (BBSRC)3 and the Natural Environment than thirty UK Universities. OpenPlant The focus of UK agricultural research Research Council (NERC).4 These are Synthetic Biology Research Centre is a has barely shifted in twenty years and funded (a total of around £1 billion in joint initiative between the University of remains firmly fixed on growth and 2016) through the science budget of the Cambridge, and the innovation, especially in genomics and government’s Department for Business, Earlham Institute, funded by the BBSRC industrial agriculture, mainly through large Energy and Industrial Strategy. and EPSRC as part of the UK Synthetic farms, corporate agribusiness and the In turn, BBSRC provides funding to Biology for Growth programme.10 industrial food sector. The UK also aims to seven institutes; the Earlham Institute, This brief look at the composition of export its industrial research platforms to John Innes, Institute of Biological, UK agricultural research suggests that other regions, especially Africa. Environmental and Rural Sciences (IBERS), the situation described by Genewatch Decisions on agricultural research Quadram Institute, , the back in 2010 has not really changed: are made by a small group whose Roslin Institute and Rothamsted Research. A small number of advisors, often composition and interests have also Together they make up the National with close links to a narrow range changed little in two decades. Scientists Institutes of Bioscience.5 of commercial interests, are highly and companies may lack sufficient Rothamsted Research, founded in influential in setting the research agenda detachment to assess their projects 1843, is one of the oldest agricultural for the biosciences. These people and dispassionately, yet there are few research stations in the world, funded by institutions reappear repeatedly on alternative viewpoints and little genuine the Lawes Agricultural Trust and BBSRC, multiple committees and task forces.11 debate. Instead, policy is narrowly with Syngenta, NERC and SARIC (see focused on science and technology for below) as ‘partners and funders’.6 The The frst and second wave industrial production. It largely excludes Lawes and Rothamsted boards currently of GM crops advocates of different approaches include a number of advocates of the Genetic engineering has been offered to agriculture such as agroecology genetic engineering/synthetic biology for the past twenty years as a solution and organic; and ethical and societal approach to agriculture. to research questions that have also considerations. Beyond occasional public There are also six Research and changed very little. We are now seeing engagement exercises where alternative Technology Clubs that are “supported the promotion of genome editing and views and suggestions are marginalised, jointly by BBSRC, other funding bodies gene drives, as new plant breeding the public is also largely excluded. and consortia of companies”.7 They techniques (NPBT). Some claim that these

For whom? Questioning the food and farming research agenda 13 are more precise, cheaper, easier to use Similar claims and promises have Act, section 43(2): “…there is a public and can solve many problems – including been made regularly by the UK science interest in ensuring that the commercial those caused by the first wave of GM establishment for at least 20 years. interests of external businesses are not crops. Suggested applications include However, problems have arisen in damaged or undermined by disclosure rendering resistant weeds connection with all GM crops so far of information which is not common vulnerable to pesticides again. commercialised globally. GM drought, knowledge and which could adversely Many advocates insist that these salt and stress-tolerant crops, promised impact on future business of these new techniques do not constitute GM, for even longer, have not materialised. stakeholders.” and therefore do not need regulation. Despite this, interests associated In 2014, Rothamsted Research held Critics respond that the techniques may with GM crops and the so-called NPBTs16 four workshops with members of the produce many unintended mutations and related patents continue to have a public and stakeholders21 on how it at unexpected sites with unknown strong influence on the direction of UK should engage with industry. The report implications; and that they should not be research.17 Current Brexit plans to draw quotes an insightful comment from a applied and their products released into closer to the US science and corporate participant: “Rothamsted seem confused the environment without regulation or risk establishments, and to increase exports – is it for commercial interest or is it for assessment to at least the same level as of these techniques, particularly to Africa, public benefit?” It also includes some GM crops.12 could increase that influence.18 ideas from the public about how they could be more involved in decision- Another obsession: Neglected approaches to making – but with a telling final sentence: the focus on agriculture “However, there was not sufficient time at There is an ongoing focus on increasing These assumptions are not likely to be the workshops to explore these ideas and wheat yields, e.g. the Wheat Genetic challenged, because the approach to the methods further with participants.” These Improvement Network (WGIN) (2003- topic lacks diversity. The UK agricultural examples show how far we are from a 18)13 and the BBSRC funded Designing establishment fails to look beyond a genuine, inclusive debate on the future of Future Wheat (DFW) programme technical approach with its constant agriculture in the UK. (2017-22)14 which involves Rothamsted emphasis on innovation19 and narrowly BBSRC highlights its public Research (RRES), the John Innes defined yields. It makes no real effort to engagement activities22 guided by the Centre (JIC) and Earlham Institute (EI), bridge the widening gap between its BioScience for Society Strategy Advisory with additional contributions from own increasingly technocratic approach Panel.23 In 2014 it held a six-hour dialogue the National Institute of Agricultural and broader agroecological perspectives with 19 selected members of the public (NIAB) and several universities. such as organic agriculture, permaculture, on BBSRC’s emerging Food, Nutrition and A current project involves GM wheat biodynamic, that see agriculture as part of Health Strategic Framework.24 The report trials at Rothamsted, funded by an interactive set of biodiverse ecological reveals that the public had questions BBSRC. It is designed to increase the systems. The food web is critical to about how BBSRC governs its work with ‘efficiency of photosynthesis by genetic the quality, health and productivity of industry, challenges industry interests modification’15 rather than looking crops, along with pollinators, beneficial and maintains independence from at wheat cultivation in the context of predators and different crops and government. However, no discussion of food systems, biodiverse ecosystems, varieties. These are just a few elements these issues is recorded. altered cropping systems or agronomic of the dynamic biological diversity that research on a wider range of crops. underpins food production and should Conclusions be central to research efforts. To challenge the assumptions underlying Justifying their position current UK agricultural research, it needs The proponents of industrial agriculture Public consultations: perfunctory to be opened up to a much wider range repeat the mantra that population and lacking transparency of voices and disciplines, and information growth, climate change, biodiversity Major funding goes into marketing the should be more accessible, with BBSRC loss and changing food habits mean products of the industrial food system. strategy advisory panel papers openly we must increase production without But there is little real public debate available online. taking more land. We therefore need about agriculture in the UK, and some The science should be much broader ‘innovative’ approaches to ‘sustainable of what does exist is hard to access. In and embrace ecological systems intensification’, using all the latest 2012, for example, the government called approaches to the issues. There are clear techniques and technologies, often in for evidence on ‘Shaping a UK Strategy societal concerns about values, ethics, combination with each other, to increase for Agri-Tech’.20 The results were only corporate influence and the framing of yields. This may sound reasonable, but released in 2015 through a Freedom of the issues to be addressed. Practices such continuously seeking to modify plants Information request. The documents as organic, biodynamic, and agroecology rather than increasing resilience through remain redacted. The response to the must drive research. a systems approach to cropping systems request acknowledges a public interest Farmers, especially small farmers, and production is a dangerously narrow in knowing who said what, but notes produce high quality food for citizens and, perspective on the role of agriculture. that under the Freedom of Information through biodiverse ecological production

14 For whom? Questioning the food and farming research agenda systems, provide additional public goods 1 www.rcuk.ac.uk 18 For example see this report [link] on the Bakubung such as clean water and healthy , 2 www.ukri.org workshop: Capacity building for the bioeconomy in adding to the resilience required for 3 www.bbsrc.ac.uk Africa, which focuses on synthetic biology for ‘low-cost, 4 www.nerc.ac.uk breakthrough technologies’ that do not need GM future food production. They should be 5 www.nib.ac.uk regulation central to discussions, not marginalised 6 Rothamsted Research Annual Review 2015 /2016 [link] 19 the word appears 27 times in the 28 pages of the or excluded from the debate about UK 7 www.bbsrc.ac.uk/innovation/sharing-challenges Rothamsted Research Strategic Report 2017 2022 8 www.bbsrc.ac.uk/innovation/sharing-challenges/circ 20 UK Government consultation outcome (2012) Shaping agriculture and its importance to society. 9 www.nerc.ac.uk/innovation/activities/sustainablefood/ a UK agri-tech strategy: call for evidence [link] Genuine public consultation should saric 21 Rothamsted Research (2014) Guiding principles be an evolving, ongoing and integral 10 www.openplant.org for working with industry. Public dialogue on how 11 Helen Wallace (2010) Bioscience for Life? Who decides Rothamsted Research should engage with industry process, and corporate power in the food what research is done in health and agriculture? [link] [link] see pages 93-6 system must be challenged. All this is vital, 12 See the European Network of Scientists for Social and 22 www.bbsrc.ac.uk/engagement or UK agricultural research will continue to Environmental Responsibility statement: [link] 23 www.bbsrc.ac.uk/about/governance-structure/panels/ 13 www.rothamsted.ac.uk/projects/wheat-genetic- society be dominated by a few narrow interests. improvement-network 24 www.bbsrc.ac.uk/engagement/dialogue/activities/ The importance of agriculture goes way 14 www.jic.ac.uk/research/designing-future-wheat/ food-nutrition-health beyond narrow issues of yields, or even 15 https://www.rothamsted.ac.uk/projects/wheat- 25 More than 75 percent decline over 27 years in total genetic-improvement-network flying insect biomass in protected areas: Hallmann production, and there are many key issues 16 Also called new genetic engineering techniques C.A., Sorg M., Jongejans E., Siepel H., Hofland N., to research, from the way we use our (NGETs) Schwan H., Stenmans W., Müller A., Sumser H., land to the nature of our food systems, 17 e.g.: the Agricultural Biotechnology Council [link], Hörren T., Goulson D., de Kroon H. (2017) More than consisting of BASF, Bayer, Dow AgroSciences, 75 percent decline over 27 years in total flying insect especially in the context of climate change Monsanto, Pioneer (DuPont) and Syngenta biomass in protected areas PLOS ONE [link] and biodiversity loss.25 ,26 26 M.J. Ascott, D.C. Gooddy, L. Wang, M.E. Stuart, M.A. Lewis, R.S. Ward & A.M. Binley (2017) Global patterns of nitrate storage in the vadose zone Nature Helena Paul is co-director of EcoNexus Communications 8:1416 [link] and has worked on land rights, agriculture, climate change, biodiversity, genetic engineering, synthetic biology, geoengineering and corporate power. www.econexus.info

Research strategy for food and farming

Steve Tones, AHDB Horticulture’s Strategy Director

The food and farming industry is plates. ADHB’s Feeding the future1 and with the strategic outcomes, but large, complicated and fragmented. It (2013) and Inspiring success2 (2017), in the synergies that can be created by consists of tens of thousands of farmers both recognise the need to re-focus bringing together organisations and and growers who produce our crops agri-food research and associated people with the same purpose. and livestock. There are also many knowledge exchange on industry The proof of the pudding will be in consultants, distributors, engineers, innovation. Ultimately, such focus the eating. Decades of fragmentation government departments and agencies, will drive up productivity, increase may take more than a few years to levy bodies, lobbyists, manufacturers, competitiveness, build resilience and overcome. But a worthy start has been marketing organisations, processors, restore the UK to its former position as a made and a clear common goal agreed, researchers, retailers and suppliers who global leader in agri-technology. which can now be carried forward into help put the safe and nutritious food we The big challenge lies in setting out the government’s Industrial Strategy. enjoy on our tables. how this might be achieved by the many The structural and technological providers of research and knowledge complexity of the industry requires exchange involved. The key is in the an overarching government research way the various private and public 1 Chris Pollock et al. (2013) Feeding the Future – Innovation Requirements for Primary Food strategy to deliver a secure future for funding streams available are directed Production in the UK to 2030 [link] the sector, and for the food on our and aligned; not just with each other 2 AHDB (2016) AHDB Strategy 2017 - 2020 [link]

For whom? Questioning the food and farming research agenda 15