Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Nanotechnologies, food, and agriculture: next big thing or flash in the pan?

  • Published:
Agriculture and Human Values Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The advent of the new nanotechnologies has been heralded by government, media, and many in the scientific community as the next big thing. Within the agricultural sector research is underway on a wide variety of products ranging from distributed intelligence in orchards, to radio frequency identification devices, to animal diagnostics, to nanofiltered food products. But the nano-revolution (if indeed there is a revolution at all) appears to be taking a turn quite different from the biotechnology revolution of two decades ago. Grappling with these issues will require abandoning both the exuberance of diffusion theory and ex post facto criticism of new technologies as well in favor of a more nuanced and proactive view that cross the fault line between the social and natural sciences.

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

Notes

  1. The Agricultural Adjustment Act of 1933 formally enshrined this economic concept in American law.

  2. For an excellent summary of what this technology can conceivably do, see Metro Group (2005).

  3. This is partially because copycat behavior is common in food processing and retailing. Patents are relatively easy to work around, and most innovations only benefit the innovators until other firms initiate their own versions of the technologies in question.

References

  • Black, J. 2004. Shutting shopping bags to prying eyes. Business Week Online. http://www.businessweek.com. Accessed 26 June 2007.

  • Bredahl, M., and W. Peterson. 1976. The productivity and allocation of research: US agricultural experiment stations. American Journal of Agricultural Economics 58 (4): 684–692.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Busch, L., and C. Bain. 2004. New! Improved? The transformation of the global agrifood system. Rural Sociology 69 (3): 321–346.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • CASPIAN. 2005. Consumers against supermarket invasion and numbering website. http://www.nocards.org/. Accessed 20 November 2005.

  • Charles, D. 2001. Lords of the harvest: biotech, big money, and the future of food. Cambridge, MA: Perseus Publishing Company.

    Google Scholar 

  • ETC Group. 2004. Down on the farm. Ottawa, Canada: Action Group on Erosion, Technology, and Concentration.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hervieu, B., and H. de Jouvenel. 2005. Research foresight. Agriculture, Food and the Environment /Prospective de la recherche. Agriculture, alimentation, environnement. Futuribles Special Issue.

  • Kilman, S. 2001. Food industry shuns bioengineered sugar. The Wall Street Journal, April 27: B5

    Google Scholar 

  • Kuzma, J., and P. VerHage. 2006. Nanotechnology in agriculture and food production: Anticipated applications. Washington, DC: Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mayer, A., and J. Mayer. 1974. Agriculture, the island empire. Daedelus 103 (3): 83–95.

    Google Scholar 

  • Metro Group. 2005. Future store initiative. Rheinberg, Germany: Metro Group. http://www.future-store.org. Accessed 20 November 2005.

  • Nation’s Restaurant News. 2001. Monsanto to stop producing genetically altered potatoes. Nation’s Restaurant News, April 9: 70.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nordmann, A. 2004. Converging technologies: shaping the future of European societies. Brussels, Belgium: European Commission.

    Google Scholar 

  • Renn, O., and M. Roco. 2006. Nanotechnology risk governance. Geneva, Switzerland: International Risk Governance Council. White Paper 2.

    Google Scholar 

  • Roco, M.C., and W.S. Bainbridge. 2002. Converging technologies for improving human performance: Nanotechnology, biotechnology, information technology, And cognitive science. Washington, DC: National Science Foundation and Department of Commerce.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rogers, E.M. 1983. Diffusion of Innovations. New York, NY: The Free Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Royal Society. 2004. Nanoscience and nanotechnologies: opportunities and uncertainties. London, UK: The Royal Society.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

I would like to thank Steve Wolf and the anonymous reviewers for their very useful help. This paper is partly based upon work supported by the National Science Foundation under Grant No. SBE 0403847 and the Michigan Agricultural Experiment Station. Any opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed in this material are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of the National Science Foundation or of my colleagues.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Institute for Food and Agricultural Standards, Michigan State University, 422 Berkey Hall, East Lansing, MI, 48824, USA

    Lawrence Busch

Authors
  1. Lawrence Busch
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Lawrence Busch.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Busch, L. Nanotechnologies, food, and agriculture: next big thing or flash in the pan?. Agric Hum Values 25, 215–218 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10460-008-9119-z

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10460-008-9119-z

Keywords

Search

Navigation