Show simple item record

dc.contributor.advisorMichael Fischer.en_US
dc.contributor.authorChaudhuri, Ashawari.en_US
dc.contributor.otherMassachusetts Institute of Technology. Program in Science, Technology and Society.en_US
dc.coverage.spatiala-ii---en_US
dc.date.accessioned2020-03-09T18:52:13Z
dc.date.available2020-03-09T18:52:13Z
dc.date.copyright2019en_US
dc.date.issued2019en_US
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/1721.1/124070
dc.descriptionThesis: Ph. D. in History, Anthropology, and Science, Technology and Society (HASTS), Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Program in Science, Technology and Society, 2019en_US
dc.descriptionCataloged from PDF version of thesis.en_US
dc.descriptionIncludes bibliographical references (pages 254-271).en_US
dc.description.abstractGenetically modified (GM) cotton, Bt cotton was introduced in India in 2002 through a joint venture company, Mahyco-Monsanto Biotech (India) Private Limited (MMB). It is a collaboration between the Indian agricultural company, Maharashtra Hybrid Seed Company (Mahyco), and the U.S. based agrochemical company, Monsanto, which is now acquired by byer. The way it translated in practice was that, the Indian seed companies purchased seeds from MMB and through conventional breeding techniques, made crosses between plants containing the Bt gene with cotton plants that are owned by the companies. From the very beginning of legalization of genetically modified Bt cotton, it emerged as the seed of certitude and doubt, of truth and ruse, of promise and disbelief at the same time. Debates were already brewing about the advantages of using transgenic cotton seeds as early as 2003.en_US
dc.description.abstractFrom "remarkable success", because of higher yields making India the second largest producer of cotton in the world, to "continuous failure" due to the increased resistance of the pests developed against Bt cotton over the years, to relating the use of transgenic seeds with massive debt cycles and farmers' suicides and large scale protests, the debate over the advantages or disadvantages of using transgenic seeds have been fierce and muddled. As Glenn Stone points out in "Constructing Facts", these opposing camps have their own "authenticating systems" that constructed their own "rules for facticity", while nullifying all others (Stone 2012). This dissertation explores these radically different entailments of the introduction of a GM crop. My work is shaped by my long-standing desire to understand how agrarian lives and experiences might inform narratives of science and the environment at national and global scales.en_US
dc.description.abstractSome of the questions that this dissertation explores are, how do different communities like farmers, scientists, regulators who are positioned on opposing ends of the agrarian political economy, understand and work with GM seeds? What are the modes of analysis, abstraction and writing about them emerge in these different sites as the materiality of the seeds get constantly entwined with the practices and experiences of the communities I study? What remains and what gets submerged when we understand biotechnology in terms of partnerships between corporate enterprises and academia, biocapital, risk studies, or cost-benefit analysis?en_US
dc.description.statementofresponsibilityby Ashawari Chaudhuri.en_US
dc.format.extent271 pagesen_US
dc.language.isoengen_US
dc.publisherMassachusetts Institute of Technologyen_US
dc.rightsMIT theses are protected by copyright. They may be viewed, downloaded, or printed from this source but further reproduction or distribution in any format is prohibited without written permission.en_US
dc.rights.urihttp://dspace.mit.edu/handle/1721.1/7582en_US
dc.subjectProgram in Science, Technology and Society.en_US
dc.titleThe kernel of doubt : agricultural biotechnology, braided temporalities, and agrarian environments in Indiaen_US
dc.title.alternativeAgricultural biotechnology, braided temporalities, and agrarian environments in Indiaen_US
dc.typeThesisen_US
dc.description.degreePh. D. in History, Anthropology, and Science, Technology and Society (HASTS)en_US
dc.contributor.departmentMassachusetts Institute of Technology. Program in Science, Technology and Societyen_US
dc.identifier.oclc1142185968en_US
dc.description.collectionPh.D.inHistory,Anthropology,andScience,TechnologyandSociety(HASTS) Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Program in Science, Technology and Societyen_US
dspace.imported2020-03-09T18:52:12Zen_US
mit.thesis.degreeDoctoralen_US
mit.thesis.departmentSTSen_US


Files in this item

Thumbnail

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record