Iowa State University Capstones, Theses and Creative Components Dissertations Fall 2021 Barriers to Adoption of GM Crops Madeline Esquivel Follow this and additional works at: https://lib.dr.iastate.edu/creativecomponents Part of the Agricultural Education Commons Recommended Citation Esquivel, Madeline, "Barriers to Adoption of GM Crops" (2021). Creative Components. 731. https://lib.dr.iastate.edu/creativecomponents/731 This Creative Component is brought to you for free and open access by the Iowa State University Capstones, Theses and Dissertations at Iowa State University Digital Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in Creative Components by an authorized administrator of Iowa State University Digital Repository. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Barriers to Adoption of GM Crops By Madeline M. Esquivel A Creative Component submitted to the Graduate Faculty in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of MASTER OF SCIENCE Major: Plant Breeding Program of Study Committee: Walter Suza, Major Professor Thomas Lübberstedt Iowa State University Ames, Iowa 2021 1 Contents 1. Introduction ................................................................................................................................. 3 2. What is a Genetically Modified Organism?................................................................................ 9 2.1 The Development of Modern Varieties and Genetically Modified Crops .......................... 10 2.2 GM vs Traditional Breeding: How Are GM Crops Produced? ........................................... 12 2.3 Worldwide Perceptions and Acceptance of GM Crops ...................................................... 13 3. Public Perception and Misinformation ..................................................................................... 14 3.1 Framing ............................................................................................................................... 15 3.2 Misinformation .................................................................................................................... 18 4.0 Potential Advantages of GM Crops ........................................................................................ 21 4.1 Population Growth .............................................................................................................. 22 4.2 Decrease in Arable Land ..................................................................................................... 25 4.3 Climate Change ................................................................................................................... 27 5.0 Concerns around GM Crops ................................................................................................... 29 5.1 Health Concerns .................................................................................................................. 30 5.2 Social and Economic Concerns ........................................................................................... 35 5.3 Environmental Concerns ..................................................................................................... 38 6. Case Studies for GM Implementation, Regulation, and Perception ......................................... 40 6.1 Argentina ............................................................................................................................. 40 6.2 India ..................................................................................................................................... 45 7.0 Potential Routes towards Greater Acceptance ........................................................................ 50 7.1 Regulation and Political Support......................................................................................... 51 7.2 Integrated Management Solutions ....................................................................................... 53 7.3 Education ............................................................................................................................. 54 References ..................................................................................................................................... 57 2 1. Introduction Plant breeding is a multifaceted discipline; however, its definition varies in specificity based on educational and research needs. According to Walter Fehr (1987), plant breeding is defined as “the art and science of the genetic improvement of plants”. Rex Bernardo (2010) builds on this by defining plant breeding as, “the genetic improvement of plants for human benefit”. More specifically, plant breeding, as a field, is a combination of both Fehr’s and Bernardo’s definitions and is the collaborative, scientific, and strategic creation of genetically desirable plants for human benefit. Advancements in plant breeding and agriculture have been major catalysts for the rise and fall of civilizations, the development of culture, and the continual survival of the human population (Fuller and Stevens, 2019). For example, hunter gatherers’ effort to select edible kernels and larger ears made teosinte, a Mexican grass and wild relative of maize, into the modern corn we grow today (Benz, 2001). One of the largest, most well-known, and most controversial byproducts of these advancements are genetically modified organisms (GMO). GMO is a common term and acronym that most people have heard of, but not many people understand what a GMO is or how to define it. Ironically, some associate ‘GMO’ with human interference in the modification of organisms, yet humans have been genetically modifying organisms for thousands of years using selection breeding and crossbreeding to isolate and create plants with desirable traits (FDA, 2020a). This negative association is due to the term GMO not being clearly defined, and freely used among consumers, the media, regulatory bodies, and even researchers. This is problematic because the term ‘GMO’ can encompass varying definitions, which may result in both negative and positive perception (Hallman et al., 2013). Crops that have been modified using microorganisms, like Agrobacterium, are often referred to 3 as ‘GMOs’, even though Agrobacterium mediated transformation is a much more complex and distinct process compared to a backcross scheme used in traditional breeding, or selection strategies used for domestication. In addition to ‘GMO’, crops that have been genetically engineered are commonly referred to as genetically modified (GM), genetically engineered (GE), or biotech crops (FDA, 2020a; ISAAA, 2020; USDA Economic Research Service, 2020a). For the purposes of this paper, genetically engineered crops will be referred to as GM crops. GM crops are the product of genetic engineering, a process defined as the “manipulation of an organism’s genes by introducing, eliminating, or rearranging specific genes using the methods of modern biology” (USDA, 2020). Genes are regions of DNA that encode proteins, which in turn dictate cell functions, or characteristics of the organism (Nature Education, 2010a). Traits are determined by one or more genes and genes are made of DNA (Nature Education, 2010a). Genetic engineering enables scientists to identify genes associated with desired traits, copy the DNA, transform it into another organism, and then grow that transformed organism (FDA, 2020a). The primary advantage of genetic engineering is its ability to broaden genetic variation and diversity that may not have been possible with conventional breeding methods (Acquaah, 2016). This is the case with the Golden Rice Project: rice does not contain β-carotene, the provitamin necessary for vitamin A conversion in the body and as a result, countries with high rice consumption suffer from varying levels of Vitamin A deficiency (Ye and Beyer, 2000). This deficiency affects millions of children worldwide and causes blindness and exacerbates common afflictions (Ye and Beyer, 2000; Rice et al., 2004; Golden Rice Project, 2020a). However, researchers were able to develop a genetically engineered rice to contain β-carotene, or “Golden Rice” and engineer beneficial genetic variation that a traditional rice breeding program 4 would not have been able to create (Ye and Beyer, 2000). Figure 1 is a comparison between transgenically developed Golden Rice grains and white rice grains. The way that GM crops are framed in the general public and represented by in the media can be problematic for researchers and confusing for consumers and regulators when assessing the safety and potential impacts of their use. Since their introduction, GM crops have generated health, environmental, social and economic concerns around safety and long-term effects. Although some critiques raised against GM might be valid, many are based in inaccurate rhetoric and misinformation disseminated by the general public and the media. There are numerous articles claiming detrimental effects of GM crops, that have been later retracted or disproven (McInerney, C. Bird and Nucci, 2004; Raman, 2018). For example, the Séralini experiment concluded that rats fed GM corn had an increased rate of tumor formation and was circulated Figure 1. Golden Rice grain compared to white rice grain in screenhouse of Golden Rice plants. By International Rice Research Institute (IRRI) - https://www.flickr.com/photos/ricephotos/5516789000/in/set-72157626241604366, CC BY 2.0, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=14908001 5 widely prior to being retracted by scientific