I was rereading biologist Richard Lewontin's book Biology as Ideology: The Doctrine of DNA a while back. Related to its basic thesis of evolutionary biology being misused, Lewontin noted several examples of the current scientific discourse that he felt demonstrated the social context behind seemingly inevitable biological advances.
The biggest one he pointed out was the development of hybrid corn in the United States. But rather than being a necessary step forward in the science of practical ideology, he argues that hybridization represents a clear socio-economic factor driving the path of biological research.
The simple fact is that choosing first gen hybrid plants over breeding new true-breeding strains is, rather bluntly, rent-seeking behavior on the part of seed farms and researchers. This is because it requires a farmer to keep purchasing new seed every year to keep the increased yields, as second gen offspring of those hybrids will display a mix of traits, reducing aggregate yields.
Developing new true-breeding strains from such first gen hybrids would be a trivial upfront cost in the long run, and would improve the efficiency of agriculture by removing the seed farm apparatus necessary to sustain the higher yields. But any firm that developed it would quickly destroy its own market, leading to considerable incentives to maintain the low equilibrium through rent-seeking behavior. Hence, first gen hybrids being sold to farmers year after year.
Lewontin notes that nothing in biology prevented the higher equilibrium. It was pure economics. So my challenge is for Green Revolution and its forbears to stray away from hybrids for true-breeding strains, and also to ask what the far reaching effects that might have.
The biggest one he pointed out was the development of hybrid corn in the United States. But rather than being a necessary step forward in the science of practical ideology, he argues that hybridization represents a clear socio-economic factor driving the path of biological research.
The simple fact is that choosing first gen hybrid plants over breeding new true-breeding strains is, rather bluntly, rent-seeking behavior on the part of seed farms and researchers. This is because it requires a farmer to keep purchasing new seed every year to keep the increased yields, as second gen offspring of those hybrids will display a mix of traits, reducing aggregate yields.
Developing new true-breeding strains from such first gen hybrids would be a trivial upfront cost in the long run, and would improve the efficiency of agriculture by removing the seed farm apparatus necessary to sustain the higher yields. But any firm that developed it would quickly destroy its own market, leading to considerable incentives to maintain the low equilibrium through rent-seeking behavior. Hence, first gen hybrids being sold to farmers year after year.
Lewontin notes that nothing in biology prevented the higher equilibrium. It was pure economics. So my challenge is for Green Revolution and its forbears to stray away from hybrids for true-breeding strains, and also to ask what the far reaching effects that might have.