of industries are collaborating with the industry within the country and 37.5 per cent of the scientists working within industry are collaborating with industry outside the country.
Let us examine the association between scientific collaboration of private-private and its performance level. Around 40.3 per cent have high performance when we compare collaboration between industries within the country. Similarly, 33.3 per cent have high performance level when we compare the association between scientific collaboration of private and private institutions and its performance level within industry at international level. The Chi-square test for the present study is non-significant.
the advancement of science. Most of the networking between actors of government, academia and industry do not occur through formal meetings rather through social networking and informal meetings where opinions can be shared more freely and more easily than formal meetings. For individual scientists working in a university, possibility to pursue research freely and on its own terms is favoured more as compared to funding opportunity from different sources. The conflict between industry and academia personnel can be avoided if proper MoU is signed in advance. Also, industry-university networking is more of contractual in nature and it is argued that short-term project is not useful in bringing about meaningful results. Thus, there is a need to introduce long-term R&D projects by the industry. It calls for increase in investment by private sector in R&D activities besides non-R&D activities. Networking in agricultural biotechnology in India mainly operates for the purpose of obtaining expensive laboratory facilities, commercializing laboratory products and procuring interdisciplinary expertise, germplasm (IPR-enabled) and other products such as vaccines, bio-pesticides, equipment, software, technologies, services, and so on. The hindrances to collaboration have surfaced through a lack of understanding, trust and cooperation, personality clashes, unequal distribution of work load based on expertise, structural, institutional and organizational frameworks, bureaucratic administrative processes, lack of networking skills abroad and debilitating effects of funding.
CHAPTER IV
TRIPLE HELIX MODEL OF INNOVATION AND THE POLITICS OF GENETICALLY MODIFIED CROPS: CASES OF BT COTTON AND BT
BRINJAL IN INDIA
The previous chapter titled, “Government-Academia-Industry: Examining Triple Helix Model of Innovation in Agricultural Biotechnology in India” dwelt upon the triple helix model of innovation in agricultural biotechnology in India by examining the networking between government, academia and industry. The networking between government, academia and industry has been initiated through scientific collaboration. It investigated the motivational factors, attitudes, interests and meanings to form such collaboration by the scientists working in different institutional setups in India. Further, networking between government, academia and industry in agriculture biotechnology sector is examined through patents, publications, projects, etc. undertaken by the scientists included in the present study.
In this context, the present chapter attempts to understand the implications of proprietary technologies in agriculture in India where two genetically modified crops namely Bt cotton (non-food crop) and Bt brinjal (food crop) are analyzed critically.
Further, an attempt is made to discuss the debates on the policies of biotechnology, in general and Bt crops, in particular. This chapter examines how diverse actors are guided by differing interests and meanings. It attempts to study the networking between government, academia and industry, with special focus on GM crops, for example, Bt cotton and Bt brinjal. This chapter further argues that if proper networking and interaction between these three actors namely, government, academia and industry is conducted it will have better adoption of agricultural biotechnology as well as it will lead to policy level changes required for GM crops. This chapter discusses the politics
embedded in the triple helix model of innovation in the context of GM crops and the influence of GM technology on Indian agriculture.
The first breakthrough in agricultural technology was high-yielding variety of wheat developed by the CIMMYT in Mexico in the 1950s. In India, agricultural technology was initiated by Indian Agricultural Research Council (IARC). Later with the development of modern technology it was realized that advantage of new technology generated by the International Research Centre is contingent upon the development of national research and extension, and with economic reforms it is dependent upon networking between different actors.
The development of insect resistance crop was seen as significant step by the industry such as Monsanto. If we look at the country-wise views on GM crops briefly, then it is a mixed scenario. In European countries, the death of butterflies leads to serious investigation on the matter and a finding was linked to damage of ecosystem on account of which GM crop is not advocated in European countries. Also, in Europe in the 1990s, fuelled by social movements based on environmental risk, threat to human health, and corporate control, pharmaceuticals, medical and industrial technology were exempted from GM. In the United States, risks associated with GM crops are clearly mentioned.
On the contrary, in India, risks associated with GM crops are not clearly defined, and at times are seldom evaluated in terms of scientific and cultural specificities. Thus, dimensions of institutionalizing state science vary greatly across crops and nations (Herring 2015a). Scientists in India argue that GM crops in agricultural biotechnology are protested and even facing a moratorium and activists groups want a permanent ban on GM crops. Transgenic crops have recorded the fastest adoption rate of any crop technology since the 1990s, for example, the case of Bt cotton in India, area under cultivation has increased up to 96 per cent (James 2012).