Policymaking in the Context of Contestations: GM Technology Debate in India
| Published date | 01 June 2018 |
| Date | 01 June 2018 |
| DOI | 10.1177/2321023018762822 |
| Author | Asheesh Navneet |
| Subject Matter | Articles |
Article
Policymaking in the Context
of Contestations: GM Technology
Debate in India
Asheesh Navneet1
Abstract
This article deals with the current conflicting discourses on the GM technology in India. To analyse the
discourse, the article adopts the theory of advocacy coalition framework (ACF) and co-dynamic model
taken from Sabatier & Weible (2007) and Millstone (2014), respectively. With the help of ACF and
co-dynamic model, an attempt is made to understand the shaping up of the theory of various arguments
on GM technology in Indian context. The theory and the model deal with the conflict of interest of
stakeholders and the primary reason for the conflict. Besides that the article deals with the reports-
presented by the Technical Expert Committee (TEC) appointed by the Supreme Court and the
Parliamentary Standing Committee appointed by the Indian Parliament to show that the available
information on GM techno-logy is contested among scientists. The article argues that the relevance of
the theory and model increases for policy participants to analyse and address various concerns coming
from the civil society groups about GM technology on production, biodiversity, environment, health
and ownership right related issues.
Keywords
GM technology, advocacy coalition framework (ACF) theory, co-dynamic model, Bt cotton
Introduction
This article deals with the politics of GM technology in India. Currently, this debate has turned controver-
sial with different policy coalitions supporting and opposing the technology. This has brought to the fore
conflicts in the state structures themselves. Given the seriousness of the implications, two recommenda-
tory committees were formed by Parliament and the Supreme Court of India in the form of Parliamentary
Standing Committee and Technical Expert Committee (TEC), respectively. Both these committees recom-
mended a moratorium on the field trials of GM crops until a mechanism for independent assessment and
1 PhD Scholar, Centre for Political Institution, Governance and Development (CPIGD), Institute for Social and Economic Change
(ISEC), Bengaluru, India.
Studies in Indian Politics
6(1) 117–131
© 2018 Lokniti, Centre for the
Study of Developing Societies
SAGE Publications
sagepub.in/home.nav
DOI: 10.1177/2321023018762822
http://journals.sagepub.com/home/inp
Corresponding author:
Asheesh Navneet, Centre for Political Institution, Governance and Development (CPIGD), Institute for Social and
Economic Change (ISEC), Bengaluru, India.
E-mail: asheeshnavneet@gmail.com
To continue reading
Request your trial