Food for the Few: The Biotechnology Revolution in Latin America
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT ABSTRACT This article introduces the main issues raised in biotechnology in Latin American agriculture in the era of neoliberal globalism. We begin by discussing the theoretical concerns regarding biotechnology's "revolutionary" potential, and identifi where empirical work could respond to these concerns. A historical overview of modern agriculture in the United States provides a means to highlight a number of problems that have arisen as a result of this technological paradigm and its transfer to the developing world. These theoretical and historical concerns are then empirically assessed with the help of we studies drawn from the forthcoming book Food for the Few. Most of these cases provide support that the technology is becoming revolutionary in its detrimental social and environmental impacts. RÉSUMÉ L'article présente les principaux enjeux que soulève l'utilisation de la biotechnotogie duns l'agriculture en Amérique latine durant la période actuelle de mondialisation néolibérale. Les auteurs discutent d'abord des préoccupations théoriques quant au potential «révolutionnaire» de la biotechnologie et précisent quels aspects du travail empirique pourraient répondre à ces préoccupations. Un survol historique de l'agriculture moderne aux États-Unis leur permet de signaler plusieurs problèmes cauéb par ce paradigme technologique et son transfert au monde en développement. Les auteurs évaluent ensuite de manière empirique ces préoccupations théoriques et historiques à l'aide d'études de cas tirées d'un livre à paraître, Food for the Few. La plupart des cas examinés appuient l'idée selon laquelle la technologie est en train de devenir révolutionnaire à cause de ses impacts nuisibles aux plans social et environnemental.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".