Abstract
India's encounter with genetically engineered Bt cotton has been a contested one, and one that has rarely conformed to expectations. I argue that two primary vantage points on the question of agricultural biotechnology – those advocating the "biosafe use" of Bt cotton or those who insist it involves "inherent problems" - frequently anticipate an "imagined farmer" in incomplete and sometimes plainly incorrect ways. Thus, there is more to the Bt cotton debate than has been considered to date. Drawing from qualitative interviews with cotton farmers in two regions of Andhra Pradesh, I call attention to the unintended effects of widespread Bt cotton cultivation and debates missing from this controversy. Misconstrual of the "imagined farmer" has edged out civil society's acknowledgement of farmers' negotiation of the (immediate and physical) risks of pesticide use as contrasted with those (more abstracted and unknown) of genetically engineered seed. Bt cotton's advocates, on the other hand, seldom address the unintended effects of its widespread use, including potentially reduced labor opportunities for the most marginal rural laborers. In conclusion, I urge a more expansive assessment of the trade-offs between risks and benefits that farmers make regarding Bt cotton, alongside a closer look at the nuances of their decision-making. Framing agribiotech risk as a matter of manageable (or inherently problematic) "biosafety" does not resonate with farmers using a broader concept of health and environmental safety threatened by heavy pesticide usage.Keywords: Bt cotton, political ecology, genetic engineering risk, pesticides, India
Highlights
India's encounter with Bt cotton – the country's first genetically engineered crop - has been highly contested and has rarely conformed to expectations
Integrated Pest Management (IPM) "is a complex, knowledge-based technology that combines biological, cultural and chemical control" in order to rein in the use of pesticides while managing pest populations at levels that do not harm the economic viability of a crop (Mancini 2006: 27)
At the heart of the Bt cotton controversy is a conflict over how decisions regarding the technology are made and who gets to make them, as well as how the impacts of, and access to, Bt cotton are managed
Summary
India's encounter with Bt cotton – the country's first genetically engineered crop - has been highly contested and has rarely conformed to expectations. This article would suggest that somewhere between the "biosafe use" and "inherent problems" of GE paradigms, there are millions of Indian farmers who are navigating risks and regulations in ways that warrant a closer look These navigations reveal a rationality in farmers' land management (Blaikie and Brookfield 1987) and can help to unpack the motives for, and impacts of Bt cotton use in India. For instance, identifies the importance of both the Vedas and the Green Revolution in the agricultural development of the village.7 This nuanced hybridity becomes increasingly elusive as Gupta's focus moves from farmers and their practices, to their leaders engaging global environmental movements - some of whom would later become rather well known for anti-GE activism in India (e.g. Nanjundaswamy's Operation Cremate Monsanto).
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
