Robin Grove-White

From Bio to Nano: Learning Lessons from the UK Agricultural Biotechnology Controversy

In this paper we develop an analysis of the public and political controversy which overtook genetically modified (GM) foods and crops in the UK in the 1990s and identify some key lessons for the future regulation and governance of nanotechnologies. Given the starkness of the ‘GM Controversy’, it is not surprising that there is now speculation in many quarters as to whether nanotechnologies might not be expected to experience a similarly rough passage. Here, it is suggested, is a further potentially transformative technology, now arguably at roughly the stage of development as was agricultural biotechnology in the late 1970s or early 1980s, and subject to similar levels of utopian promise, expectation and dystopian fear (Nordmann, 2004b). Some NGOs are already suggesting that the issues and problems that nanotechnology raises are of such far-reaching political and social importance that ‘governments [should] declare an immediate moratorium on commercial production of new nanomaterials and launch a transparent global process for evaluating the socioeconomic, health and environmental implications of the technology’ (ETC, 2003, p. 72). Crudely put, the agricultural GM experience represents a warning, a cautionary tale of how not to assess an emerging technology and allay public concern. For many, addressing the question ‘Is nanotechnology the next GM?’ is critical to the commercial success and public acceptability of emerging applications in the field. As such the ‘GM experience’ has been portrayed as a model ‘to be avoided’ in the future development and governance of nanotechnology. The comparison between GM and nanotechnology—and the lessons that may be drawn from the regulation of biotechnology—has been made in a number of different contexts (see, for example, Einsiedel and Goldenberg, 2004; Mayer, 2002; Brumfiel, 2003; Wolfson, 2003; Mehta, 2004). As discussed below our analysis here is Science as Culture Vol. 15, No. 4, 291–307, December 2006

Social learning and sustainable communities: An interim assessment of research into sustainable communities projects in the UK

The delivery of many of the most pressing environmental issues will rely on changes in environmental attitudes and behaviour at community level. At a UN Special Session in 1997, the British Government highlighted its initiatives on Local Agenda 21 (LA21) and Going for Green (GFG) as significant advances. This paper adds a new perspective, drawing on the range of experiences of some of the research teams that have been working with local authorities on pilot Sustainable Community Projects (SCPs) in England and Scotland. It sheds light on three substantive themes: the tensions inherent in the implementation of internationally and nationally agreed goals through local action; the ambiguity of local agencies acting as facilitators of community ownership of processes, and the requirements for successful partnership between local authorities and higher education.

Maximising the local economic, environmental and social benefits of a university: Lancaster University.

The paper presents the main conclusions from an in-depth study of the local economic, social and environmental impacts of Lancaster University in 1991/92. The likely impacts of further expansion at the University through to the year 2001 are explored. Lancaster University is revealed as having major environmental and social impacts as well as the more widely researched employment and income multiplier effects. Lessons are drawn from the Lancaster University experience which are likely to be of a general nature and can assist other universities seeking to maximise their local benefits and minimise their local cost impacts. The local impacts of universities are likely to need much more careful management than has occurred in the past if detrimental effects are to be avoided.

Genetically modified theology : the religious dimensions of public concerns about agricultural biotechnology.

This is a PDF version of an article published in Studies in Christian Ethics© 2001. The definitive version is available at http://sce.sagepub.com/

Getting Behind Environmental Ethics

There are major problems in the way in which the environmental ‘ethics’ question is now being framed – problems which could lead to growing confusion and disillusionment, unless they are rapidly addressed and understood. It is on such problems that this paper focuses. We point to three dimensions of the environmental ‘phenomenon’ which prevailing accounts of environmental ethics are tending to overlook. We then identify several ways in which incomplete ethical models tend to be reflected in actual environmental policy discourse. Finally, we suggest three hitherto-absent ingredients which will need to be recognised if future models of the ethics question are to be able to reflect, and hence to engage adequately with, social reality.

Britain's genetically modified crop controversies: the Agriculture and Environment Biotechnology Commission and the negotiation of 'uncertainty'.

The genetically modified crop controversies in Britain between 1997 and 2004 involved tensions surrounding the role of science in policy. The author of the paper was a member of the Agriculture and Environment Biotechnology Commission, a novel government advisory body created in 2000, which played a central role in negotiating new policy frameworks. The commission was also a key influence in the creation and execution of the three-pronged official ‘GM dialogue’ in 2002 and 2003. New understandings of ‘uncertainty’, both scientific and social, emerged as a result. The outcomes have relevance for the future political handling of other technological fields, including human genetics.

The Local Economic Impact of Construction Projects in a Small and Relatively Self-contained Economy: The case of Lancaster University

Whilst the local multiplier impacts of the annual operation of universities has been the subject of intensive research, the economic impacts of capital construction projects have been almost completely ignored. This paper presents the results of detailed analysis of capital projects at Lancaster University in 1993- The reasons for the radically different annual operation and construction multipliers estimated in the Lancaster study are examined. Despite the smaller size of construction multipliers it is argued that it is a serious mistake to estimate local construction multipliers by making simplifying assumptions on the size of the key parameters in the multiplier equations.