Issue

Vol. 33 No. 2 (2008): Africa Development

1 - Democratization of Science and Biotechnological Development: Public Debate on GM Maize in South Africa

https://doi.org/10.4314/ad.v33i2.57274
Pascal Newbourne Mwale
is Lecturer of Philosophy, Chancellor College, University of Malawi, Malawi, and currently Doctoral Research Fellow, The Constitution of Public Intellectual Life Research Project, University of the Witwatersrand, Johannesburg, South Africa.

Corresponding Author(s) : Pascal Newbourne Mwale

pmwale2003@yahoo.co.uk

Africa Development, Vol. 33 No. 2 (2008): Africa Development

Abstract

The Mandela government that came into power in 1994 made the democratiza- tion of science and technology a priority in post-apartheid South Africa. At- tendant ideas of Science Communication and Public Understanding of Biotech- nology have hitherto become currency in South Africa’s public sector drive towards the democratization of science. Democratization of science and tech- nology implies that the people, as non-experts, are an integral part of all delibera- tions on policy, regulation and control of science and technology, for example, in debates or controversies on issues arising from biotechnology. Democratiza- tion of science and technology is about the sociopolitical control of science and technology by the wider society. Science and technology must be controlled by the society at large because evil-minded groups of people can ill-use it to inflict harm on other groups of people. Moreover, certain unscrupulous and corrupt business entities can collude with the state and/or powerful and influential sociopolitical figures in societies to exploit and abuse indigenous scientific resources as well as endogenous modes of specialized scientific knowledge. On the latter, for example, they can evoke intellectual property rights (IPR) to patent resources that are not theirs historically. Thus, the ideal-type of democracy makes it imperative for the people of South Africa and of other societies in Africa to understand and actively participate in the development of science and tech- nology. This necessitates increasing scholarly attention to be given to questions of science communication and public understanding of science, arising at the intersection between science, society and politics in South and southern Africa. This paper discusses the role and importance of social movements in science communication and public understanding of biotechnology in South and southern Africa.

Keywords

democratization of science Biotechnological GM maize technology social movements civil society South Africa
[1]
Mwale, P.N. 2021. 1 - Democratization of Science and Biotechnological Development: Public Debate on GM Maize in South Africa. Africa Development. 33, 2 (Oct. 2021). DOI:https://doi.org/10.4314/ad.v33i2.57274.
Download Citation
Endnote/Zotero/Mendeley (RIS)
BibTeX
References
  1. Atiku-Abubakar, J.J. and Shaw-Taylor, Y., 2003, ‘An empirical profile of weak states in sub-Saharan Africa’, Africa Development XXVIII (3&4): 168–185.
  2. Ballard, R., Habib, A. and Valodia, I. (eds), 2006, Voices of Protest: Social movements in post-apartheid South Africa, Scottsville: University of KwaZulu-Natal Press.
  3. Bashaw, Z.N., 2001, ‘NGO–government relations: Conflict and co-operation in development management for rehabilitation of demobilized soldiers: The case of Eastern Tigray, Ethiopia’, Africa Development XXVI (1&2): 251–294.
  4. Bratton, M., 1989, ‘Civil society and associational life in Africa’, World Politics 41(3): 407–430.
  5. Buck, J.A., Dent, E.B. and Umpleby, S.A., 2000, Commentary: Communicating science, Science Communication 22(1): 73–87.
  6. Callaghy, T.M., 1994, ‘Civil society, democracy, and the state in Africa: A dissenting opinion about resurgent societies’, in Haberson, J., Rothchild, D. and N. Chazan, N. (eds), Civil Society and the State in Africa, London: Lynne Rienner, pp. 231–254.
  7. Comaroff, J.L. and Comaroff, J. (eds), Civil Society and the Political Imagination in Africa: Critical perspectives, Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
  8. Chandhoke, N., 2001, ‘‘The ‘civil’ and the ‘political’ in civil society’’, Democratization 8(2) (Summer): 1–24.
  9. Chatterjee, P., 2001, ‘On civil and political society in postcolonial states, in Kaviraj, S. and Khilnani’, S. (eds), Civil Society: History and possibilities, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 165–178.
  10. Chinsembu, T. and Kambikambi, T., 2001, ‘Farmers’ perceptions and expectations of genetic engineering in Zambia’, Biotechnology and Development Monitor 47; 13–15.
  11. Cook, G., Robbins, P.T. and Pieri, E., 2006, ‘Words of mass destruction’: British newspaper coverage of the genetically modified debate, expert and non-expert reactions, Public Understanding of Science 15(1): 5–29.
  12. Corbett, J.B. and Durfee, J.L., 2004, ‘Testing public (un)certainty of science: Media representations of global warming’, Science Communication 26(2): 129–151.
  13. Deakin, N., 2001, In Search of Civil Society, Basingstoke: Palgrave.
  14. Ferguson, A., 1980, An Essay on the History of Civil Society, with a new introduction by L. Schneider, New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction Books.
  15. Fraser, N., 1993, ‘Rethinking the public sphere: A contribution to the critique of actually existing democracy, in Calhoun’, C. (ed.), Habermas and the Public Sphere, Cambridge, MA: Polity Press, pp. 109–142.
  16. Fukuyama, F., 2003, Our Posthuman Future: Consequences of the biotechnology revolution, London: Profile Books.
  17. Gellner, E., 1995, ‘Civil society and its future, in Hall’, J.A. (ed.), Civil Society: Theory, History, Comparison, Cambridge, MA; MIT/Polity Press.
  18. Greenstein, R., 2005, ‘Social movements and public intellectual life, Johannesburg: University of the Witwatersrand’ (unpublished).
  19. Gutteling, J., Hanssen, L, van der Veer, N. and Seydel, E., 2006, ‘Trust in governance and the acceptance of genetically modified in the Netherlands’, Public Understanding of Science 15(1): 103–112.
  20. Habermas, J., 1989, The Structural Transformation of the Public Sphere: An inquiry into a category of bourgeois society. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
  21. Hawthorn, G., 2001, ‘The promise of ‘civil society’ in the South, in Kaviraj, S. and Khilnani’, S. (eds), Civil Society: History and possibilities, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 269–286.
  22. Hijmans, E., Pleitjter, A. and Wester, F., 2003, ‘Covering scientific research in Dutch newspapers’, Science Communication 25(2): 153–176.
  23. Horst, M., 2005, ‘Cloning sensations: Mass mediated articulation of social responses to controversial biotechnology’, Public Understanding of Science 14(2): 185–200.
  24. Howell, J. and Pearce, J., 2001, Civil Society and Development: A critical exploration, London: Lynne Rienner.
  25. HSRC Review, 2005, ‘Bio what? Public has scant knowledge of biotechnology’, HSRC Review,3(2) (July): 2.
  26. Huijer, M., 2003, ‘Reconsidering democracy: History of the Human Genome Project’, Science Communication 24(4): 479–502.
  27. Hutchful, E., 1998, ‘The civil society debate in Africa’, International Journal 51(1): 54–77.
  28. Joubert, M., 2001, ‘Report: Priorities and challenges for science communication in South Africa’, Science Communication 22(3): 316–333.
  29. Keane, J., 1998, Civil Society: Old images, new visions, Cambridge, MA: MIT/ Polity Press.
  30. Keane, J., 2003, Global Civil Society?, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  31. Khanna, J., 2001, ‘Science communication in developing countries: Experience from WHO workshops’, Science Communication 23(1): 50–56.
  32. Khembo, N.S., 2004, ‘The multiparty promise betrayed: The failure of neo-liberalism in Malawi’, Africa Development XXIX (2): 80–105.
  33. Khilnani, S., 2001, ‘The development of civil society, in Kaviraj’, S. and Khilnani, S. (eds), Civil Society: History and possibilities, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp 11–32.
  34. Larson, B.M.H., Nerlich, B. and Wallis, P., 2005, ‘Metaphors and biorisks: The war on infectious diseases and invasive species’, Science Communication 26(3): 243–268.
  35. Latour, B., 1987, Science in Action: How to follow scientists and engineers through society, Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
  36. Logan, R.A., Park, J. and Shin, J., 2004, ‘Elite sources, context, and news topics: How two Korean newspapers covered a public health crisis’, Science Communication 25(4): 364–398.
  37. Mandela, N.R., 1994, cited in Preface to White Paper on Science and Technology, 4 September 1996, Department of Arts, Culture, Science and Technology, Republic of South Africa. Pretoria.
  38. Manzini, S., 2003, ‘Effective communication of science in a culturally diverse society’, Science Communication 25(2): 191–197.
  39. Mbembe, A., 2001, On the Postcolony, Berkeley: University of California Press.
  40. McInerney, C., Bird, N. and Nucci, M., 2004, ‘The flow of scientific knowledge from lab to the lay public: The case of genetically modified food’, Science Communication 26(1): 44–74.
  41. Migdal, J.S., 1988, Strong Societies and Weak States, Princeton: Princeton University Press.
  42. Migdal, J.S., 2001, State in Society, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  43. Mountcastle-Shah, E., Tambor, E, Bernhardt, B.A. et al., 2003, ‘Assessing mass media reporting of disease-related genetic discoveries’, Science Communication 24(2): 458–478.
  44. Mwale, P.N., 2005a, ‘Public debates and societal deliberations: The case of the Zambian National Consultation on GM Maize Food Aid in 2002’, Paper presented at the Science and Democracy Conference 3, Institute of Philosophy, Naples, Italy, 20–22 October. See http://www.dipmat.unipg.it/~mamone/sci-dem/introduction.htm
  45. Mwale, P.N., 2005b, ‘GM Maize Food Aid in Zimbabwe (2001–2004)’, Johannesburg: University of the Witwatersrand (unpublished).
  46. Mwale, P.N., 2006, ‘Societal deliberation on genetically modified maize in southern Africa: The debateness and publicness of the Zambian national consultation on genetically modified maize food in 2002’, Public Understanding of Science 15(2): 89–102.
  47. Obadare, E., 2004, ‘The alternative genealogy of civil society and its implications for Africa: Notes for further research’, Africa Development XXIX (4): 1–18.
  48. Pelletier, D., 2005, ‘Food safety and consumer choice policy, in Owamo’, S.W. and von Grebmer, K. (eds), Biotechnology, Agriculture, and Food Security in Southern Africa, Washington, DC and Harare: IFPRI and FANRPAN, pp. 113– 156.
  49. Roche, J.P. and Muskavitch, M.A.T., 2003, ‘Limited precision in print and media communication of West Nile Virus risks’, Science Communication 24(3): 353– 365.
  50. Shoemaker, P.J. and Reese S.D., 1996, Mediating the Message: Theories of influences on mass media content, London: Longman.
  51. Smith, J., 2004, Seeds of Deception, London: Green Books.
  52. Tanner, A.H., 2004, ‘Agenda building, source selection, and health news at local television stations: A nationwide survey of local television health reporters’, Science Communication 25(4): 350–363.
  53. Tester, K., 1992, Civil Society, London and New York: Routledge.
  54. Trumbo, C.W., Dunwoody, S. and Griffin, R.J., 1998, ‘Journalists, cognition and the presentation of an epidemiological study’, Science Communication 19(3): 238–265.
  55. Van der Walt, W.J., 2000, ‘South Africa and the global biotechnology battle’, BIOY2K Combined Millennium Meeting: Programme and Abstracts, Grahamstown: Rhodes University, 23–28 January, pp. 34–35.
  56. Walters, L.M. and Walters, T.N., 2006, ‘It loses something in the translation: Syntax and survival of key words in science and nonscience press releases’, Science Communication 18(2): 165–180.
  57. Weigold, M.F., 2001, ‘Communicating science: A review of the literature’, Science Communication 23(2): 164–193.
  58. Weingart, P., Engels, A. and Pansegrau, P., 2000, ‘Risks of communication: Discourses on climate change in science, politics, and the media’, Public Understanding of Science 9: 263–283.
Read More

Author Biography

Pascal Newbourne Mwale, is Lecturer of Philosophy, Chancellor College, University of Malawi, Malawi, and currently Doctoral Research Fellow, The Constitution of Public Intellectual Life Research Project, University of the Witwatersrand, Johannesburg, South Africa.

is Lecturer of Philosophy, Chancellor College, University of Malawi, Malawi, and currently Doctoral Research Fellow, The Constitution of Public Intellectual Life Research Project, University of the Witwatersrand, Johannesburg, South Africa. E-mail: pmwale2003@yahoo.co.uk, Pascal-Mwale@wits.ac.za,

Download
PDF
Statistic
Read Counter : 1130 Download : 49

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Similar Articles

<< < 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 > >> 

You may also start an advanced similarity search for this article.