Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Social Exclusion and Transgenic Technology: The Case of Brazilian Agriculture

  • Published:
Journal of Business Ethics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Many argue that transgenic technology will have wide-ranging implications for farmers in developing nations. A key concern is that competencies may be destroyed by predominantly foreign multinational transgenic technologies, exacerbating problems of social exclusion in the case of subsistence farmers. Conversely, those that fail to adopt the technology may become uncompetitive, particularly in commodity-based export markets. Drawing on interview data conducted in Brazil and supporting data collected in North America, Europe and China, we found that the impact of transgenic technology varies. It has less impact on farmers that adapt the products to their crop systems and environment, and greater negative implications for less formally educated subsistence farmers in consequence of both complexity and compatibility. Earlier attempts at industrializing agriculture through technological innovation led to vastly improved agricultural output and exports, but the benefits of productivity was not equitably distributed [D. Lee: 2005, American Journal of Agricultural Economics 87(5), 1325–1334], nor was it designed to meet specific local environmental and socioeconomic farmer conditions, exacerbating social exclusion. Multinationals attempting to introduce transgenic technology without considering the broader social and ethical implications will invite resistance. We discuss the implications for policy makers, multinationals and small-scale farmers.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Aerni P. (2002) Stakeholder Attitudes towards the Risks and Benefits of Agricultural Biotechnology in Developing Countries: A Comparison between Mexico and the Philippines. Risk Analysis 26(6)1123–1137

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Afuah A. (1998) Innovation Management: Strategies, Implementation and Profits. Oxford University Press, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Aldrich H., Fiol M. (1994) Fools Rush In: The Institutional Context of Industry Creation. Academy of Management Review 19(4):645–670

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Atkinson R. (2000) Combating Social Exclusion in Europe: The New Urban Policy Challenge. Urban Studies 37:1037–1055

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Baumol W. (1990) Entrepreneurship: Productive, Unproductive, and Destructive. Journal of Political Economy 98(5):893–921

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Behrman, J., A. Gaviria and M. Szekely (eds.): 2003, Who’s In and Who’s Out: Social Exclusion in Latin America (Inter-American Development Bank, Washington D.C.)

  • Berg, S.: 1988, ‚Snowball Sampling’, in S. Kotz and N. L. Johnson (eds.), Encyclopaedia of Statistical Sciences, Vol. 8

  • Bijker W. (1995) Of Bicycles, Bakelites, and Bulbs: Toward a Theory of Sociotechnical Change MIT Press, Cambridge, MA and London

    Google Scholar 

  • Borges da Fonseca, F.: 2003, Brazil Exporter Guide Annual 2003. USDA Foreign Agricultural Service GAIN Report. www.fas.usda.gov. Accessed August 11, 2003

  • Buvinic M.(2004) Introduction: Social Exclusion in Latin America, In: Buvinic M., Mazza J., Deutsch R. (eds), Social Exclusion and Economic Development in Latin America, et al. Inter-American Development Bank and Johns Hopkins University Press, Washington D.C. 3–32

    Google Scholar 

  • Buvinic, M., J. Mazza and R. Deutsch (eds.): 2004, Social Exclusion and Economic Development in Latin America, et al (Inter-American Development Bank and Johns Hopkins University Press, Washington D.C.)

  • Charles D. (2001) Lords of the Harvest: Biotech, Big Money, and the Future of Food. Cambridge, Mass, Perseus

    Google Scholar 

  • Chataway J., Tait J., Wield D. (2004) Understanding Company R&D Strategies in Agro-Biotechnology: Trajectories and Blind Spots. Research Policy 33(6/7):1041–1057

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Clark K., Wheelwright S. (1993) Managing New Product and Process Development: Text and Cases. New York, Free Press

    Google Scholar 

  • Clarkson M. (1995) A Stakeholder Framework for Analyzing and Evaluating Corporate Social Performance. Academy of Management Review 20:92–117

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cohen W., Levinthal D. (1990) Absorptive Capacity: A New Perspective on Learning and Innovation. Administrative Science Quarterly, 35:128–152

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Commins, P. (ed.): 1993, Combating Exclusion in Ireland, 1990–94: A Midway Report (European Commission, Brussels)

  • Dosi, G., C. Freeman, R. Nelson, G. Silverberg and L. Soete (eds.): 1988. Technical Change and Economic Theory (Pinter, London)

  • Eisenhardt K. (1989) Building Theories from Case Study Research. Academy of Management Review 14(4):532–550

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ferraz, J. M. G.: 1999, ‚A insustentabilidade da revolução verde, informativo meio ambiente e agricultura (EMBRAPA)’, 8(26), 25–28, http://www.cnpma. embrapa.br/ informativo/mostra_informativo.php3?id = 108, accessed October 22, 2005

  • Ferrell O., Fraedrich J., Ferrell L. (2002) Business Ethics: Ethical Decision Making and Cases Houghton Mifflin Company, Boston

    Google Scholar 

  • Fletcher L. (2001) GM Crops No Panacea for Poverty. Nature Biotechnology 19:797–798

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Freeman R. E. (1984) Strategic Management: A Stakeholder Approach. Pitman, Boston

    Google Scholar 

  • Friedman, M.: 1970, ‚The Social Responsibility of Business Is to Increase Its Profits’, New York Times Magazine (1 September 1970). Reprinted in Tom L. Beauchamp and Norman E. Bowie (eds.), Ethical Theory and Business (Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, N.J., 1993)

  • Furtado, R.: 2004, ‚A pesquisa que revolucionou a agricultura’, Scientific American Brasil, 22, (March), available at: http://sciam.uol.com.br/sciam/materia.aspx?mat_ codigo = 42

  • Galbraith J. K. (1967) The New Industrial State 4th ed.). Haoughton Mifflin, Boston

    Google Scholar 

  • Glaser B. G., Strauss A. L., (1967) The Discovery of Grounded Theory: Strategies for Qualitative Research. Aldine, Atherton

    Google Scholar 

  • Graham G. (2001) Learning from the “Terminator” Debacle. International Journal of Biotechnology 3(3):260–266

    Google Scholar 

  • Hall J., Martin M. (2005) Disruptive Technologies, Stakeholders and the Innovation Value Chain: A Framework for Evaluating Radical Technology Development. R&D Management Journal 35(3):273–284

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hall J., Vredenburg H. (2003) The Challenges of Innovating for Sustainable Development. MIT Sloan Management Review 45(1):61–68

    Google Scholar 

  • Hall, J. and H. Vredenburg: 2004, ‚Risk Strategies and Stakeholder Ambiguity’, in Strategic Management Society Proceedings, Puerto Rico, October 2004

  • Hall J., Vredenburg H. (2005) Managing Stakeholder Ambiguity. MIT Sloan Management Review 47(1):11–13

    Google Scholar 

  • Handy, C.: 1992, ‚Balancing Cooperate Power: A New Federalist Paper’, Harvard Business Review Nov–Dec, 59–67

  • Hart, S.: 1997, ‚Beyond Greening: Strategies for a Sustainable World’, Harvard Business Review January–February, 66–77

  • Hart S., Milstein M. (1999) Global Sustainability and the Creative Destruction of Industries. MIT Sloan Management Review 41(1):23–33

    Google Scholar 

  • Henderson V. (1982) The Ethical Side of Enterprise Sloan Management Review 23(3):37–47

    Google Scholar 

  • Hobday M. (1995). East Asian Latecomer Firms: Learning the Technology of Electronics. World Development 23(7):1171–1194

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hosmer L. (1991) The Ethics of Management. Irwin, Homewood, IL

    Google Scholar 

  • Hospers J. (1988) Ethics and Law. In: Machan T. (ed.), Commerce and Morality. Rowman & Littlefield, Totowa, NJ

    Google Scholar 

  • Huang J., Pray C., Rozelle S. (2002) Enhancing the Crops to Feed the Poor. Nature 418:678–684

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hymer S. H. (1976) The International Operations of National Firms: A Study of Direct Investment. Cambridge, MA, MIT Press

    Google Scholar 

  • IBOPE: 2002, IBOPE – Instituto Brasileiro de Opinião Pública e Estatística. Pesquisa de Opinião Pública sobre Transgênicos. Available at: http://www.idec.org.br/files/ pesquisa_transgenicos.pdf. Accessed August 12, 2003

  • James, C.: 2003, Global Status of Commercialized Transgenic Crops-2003, ISAAA Briefs, No. 30, Ithaca, New York

  • Jensen M. (2001) Value Maximization, Stakeholder Theory, and the Corporate Objective Function. Journal of Applied Corporate Finance 14(3):8–21

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kindleberger C. (1969). American Business Abroad. New Haven, CT, University Press

    Google Scholar 

  • Kuratko D., Welsch H. (2004) Strategic Entrepreneurial Growth. Thomson South-Western, Mason, OH

    Google Scholar 

  • Lee D. (2005) Agricultural Sustainability and Technology Adoption: Issues and Policies for Developing Countries. American Journal of Agricultural Economics 87(5):1325–1334

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • London T., Hart S. L. (2004) Reinventing Strategies for Emerging Markets: Beyond the Transnational Model. Journal of International Business Studies, 35(5):350–370

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Magretta J. (1997) Growth through Global Sustainability: An Interview with Monsanto’s CEO, Robert B. Shapiro. Harvard Business Review 75(1):78–88

    Google Scholar 

  • Makin, K. and A. Dunfield: 2004, ‚Monsanto Wins Key Biotech Ruling’, Globe & Mail, Friday, May 21, 2004, p. 1

  • Martins, F. and M. Gasparin: 2003, ‚Governador diz que ministro interino se comporta como “vendedor da Monsanto” Gazeta do Povo, Nov 11’, in Assessoria de Imprensa, Ministerio Publico do Estado do Parana, Procuradoria Geral da Justica

  • Massarani, L.: 2004, ‚Brazil Delays GM Crops and Cloning Bill’, SciDev.Net, September 24, 2004

  • Mazza J. (2004) Social Inclusion, Labor Markets and Human Capital in Latin America. In Buvinic M., Mazza J., Deutsch R. (eds) Social Exclusion and Economic Development in Latin America, et al. Inter-American Development Bank and Johns Hopkins University Press, Washington D.C., 179–200

    Google Scholar 

  • Millstone E., van Zwanenberg P. (2003) Food and Agricultural Biotechnology Policy: How Much Autonomy Can Developing Countries Exercise? Development Policy Review 21:655–667

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ministry of Agricultural Development: 2004, Secretaria de Desenvolvimento Territorial, available at http://www. mda.gov.br/index.php?pg = caderno&id_item = 38& id_menu = 21. Accessed January 21, 2004

  • Mitchell R., Agle B., Wood D. (1997) Toward a Theory of Stakeholder Identification and Salience: Defining the Principle of Who and What Really Counts. Academy of Management Review 22(4):853–886

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ocampa J. (2004) Economic Development and Social Inclusion. In Buvinic M., Mazza J., Deutsch R. (eds), Social Exclusion and Economic Development in Latin America, et al. Inter-American Development Bank and Johns Hopkins University Press, Washington D.C., 33–41

    Google Scholar 

  • Parayil G. (2003) Mapping Technological Trajectories of the Green Revolution and the Gene Revolution from Modernization to Globalization. Research Policy 32:971–990

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Phillips R., Freeman R., Wicks A. (2003) What Stakeholder Theory is NOT. Business Ethics Quarterly 13(4):479–502

    Google Scholar 

  • Robson C. (1993) Real World Research. Cambridge, Blackwell

    Google Scholar 

  • Rogers E. (1995) Diffusion of Innovation 4th Ed. New York, Free Press

    Google Scholar 

  • Rosenkopf L., Tushman M. (1988) The Coevolution of Community Networks and Technology: Lessons from the Flight Simulation Industry. Industrial and Corporate Change 7:311–346

    Google Scholar 

  • Salomon, M., J. Duailibi and A. Soliani: 2004, ‚MP vai liberar transgênico pela metade’, Folha de Sao Paulo, Editoria: Dinheiro, p. B8, São Paulo Oct 15, 2004

  • Schumpeter J. (1934) The Theory of Economic Development: An Inquiry into Profits, Capital, Credit, Interest, and the Business Cycle. Cambridge, Mass, Harvard University Press

    Google Scholar 

  • Sen, A.: 1997, Social Exclusion. Concept, Application and Scrutiny (Asian Development Bank, Social Development Papers No 1, 2000, Manila)

  • Shapiro, R.: 2000, ‚The Welcome Tension of Technology: The Need for Dialogue About Agricultural Biotechnology’, in Business Leaders: Thought and Action CEO Series, Issue 37 (Center for the Study of American Business, Washington University)

  • Simon, H.: 1962, ‚The Architecture of Complexity: Hierarchic Systems’, Proceedings of the American Philosophical Society December, 467–482

  • Simon H. (1969) The Sciences of the Artificial. Cambridge, Mass, MIT Press

    Google Scholar 

  • Smith, A.: 1776, The Wealth of Nations, Book I Chapter VIII

  • Stiglitz J. (2002) Employment, Social Justice and Societal Well-Being. International Labour Review 141(1):9–29

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tait J. (2001) More Faust than Frankenstein: The European Debate about Risk Regulation for Genetically Modified Crops. Journal of Risk Research, 42(2):175–189

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Teece D. (1986) Profiting from Technological Innovation. Research Policy 15:285–305

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tushman M., Anderson P. (1986) Technological Discontinuities and Organizational Environments. Administrative Science Quarterly 31:439–465

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Utterback J. (1994) Mastering the Dynamics of Innovation. Cambridge, Mass, Harvard Business School Press

    Google Scholar 

  • Weber E. U., Hsee C. (1998) Cross-cultural Differences in Risk Perception, but Cross-cultural Similarities in Attitudes towards Perceived Risk. Management Science, 44(9):1205–1217

    Google Scholar 

  • Whitfield A., Leiss W. (1997) Mad Cows or Crazy Communication. In Powell D., Leiss W. (eds.) Mad Cows and Mothers Milk. Montreal, McGill-Queen’s Press, 3–24

    Google Scholar 

  • Williamson O. (1975) Markets and Hierarchies: Analysis and Antitrust Implications. Free Press, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Yin R. (1984) Case Study Research: Design and Methods. Beverly Hills, CA, Sage Publishing

    Google Scholar 

  • Zaheer S. (1995) Overcoming the Liability of Foreignness. Academy of Management Journal, 38(2):341–364

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. International Institute for Resource Industries and Sustainability Studies, Haskayne School of Business, University of Calgary, 2500 University Drive N.W., T2N 1N4, Calgary, AB, Canada

    Jeremy Hall, Stelvia Matos & Cooper H. Langford

Authors
  1. Jeremy Hall
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Stelvia Matos
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Cooper H. Langford
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Jeremy Hall.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Hall, J., Matos, S. & Langford, C.H. Social Exclusion and Transgenic Technology: The Case of Brazilian Agriculture. J Bus Ethics 77, 45–63 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-006-9293-0

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-006-9293-0

Keywords

Search

Navigation