Implementation of biotechnology research and development policy : implications for agricultural sustainability
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Biotechnology has been represented as the key to agricultural sustainability and as a means of increasing world food supply. The thesis examines the implementation of agricultural biotechnology policies in Canada, specifically canola and the effects of these policies on research and development and implications for agricultural sustainability. Concepts of sustainability were reviewed and a conceptual framework for assessing agricultural sustainability developed. Approaches to sustainable agriculture were divided into ; growth and conservation oriented approaches. Sustainability criteria were developed within a conservation-oriented approach. Public involvement was deemed necessary to identify priorities for sustainable agriculture and create a more socially responsive approach to policy making. Criteria for effective public involvement were identified through the literature. Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada (AAFC) documents were assessed against the sustainability criteria. Most government documents subscribed to a growth- oriented, economic approach to agriculture which relegated sustainability concerns to secondary status. AAFC's emphasis on economic growth has affected public involvement, research and development in agriculture, particularly new canola variety development. The process for variety registration of new canola varieties involves two influential interest groups; both have strong links to industry and are pro-biotechnology. As a result, biotechnology has been supported through the process, to the detriment of other technologies. None of the sustainability criteria were addressed in the recommendation for acceptance for new canola varieties to AAFC. AAFC, as the decision-makers, accepted recommendations of the interest groups generally without question. Participation in the process was strictly limited and represented a narrow range of interests, largely the industrial sector. Public and private sector biotechnology researchers were interviewed to ascertain their views of biotechnology in agriculture. Contribution to sustainability was not a primary motive for identifying research goals and the majority of researchers did not support public involvement in policy making or technology assessment. Farmers, as users of biotechnology, were surveyed by mail. Results indicated that many farmers do not follow recommended agricultural practices and distrust government sources of information. AAFC does not have the information necessary for assessing the impact of biotechnology in agriculture. The thesis suggests methods by which the public could be involved in setting priorities for agricultural research, policy development and technology assessment.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».