What 2002 did for the GM debate

By: Peter Aldous

We encourage you to republish this article online and in print, it’s free under our creative commons attribution license, but please follow some simple guidelines:

You have to credit our authors.
You have to credit SciDev.Net — where possible include our logo with a link back to the original article.
You can simply run the first few lines of the article and then add: “Read the full article on SciDev.Net” containing a link back to the original article.
If you want to also take images published in this story you will need to confirm with the original source if you're licensed to use them.
The easiest way to get the article on your site is to embed the code below.

For more information view our media page and republishing guidelines.

The full article is available here as HTML.

Press Ctrl-C to copy

<div class="article-wrap">
<div id="article-introduction">
<h1>What 2002 did for the GM debate</h1>
<h4>By: Peter Aldous</h4>
</div>
<br />
<br />

<div id="article-body">
<p>It has been another year of many disputes in the perennially controversial area of genetically modified (GM) crops.<BR><BR>In this article, Peter Aldous looks back at some of these controversies — from the contested finding that transgenic maize is growing in Mexico, to Zambia’s refusal to accept donations of GM food aid.<BR><BR>Other countries have emerged as proponents of GM over the past year. India, for example, approved commercial planting of GM cotton in March. But doubts remain about the ability of the developing world to monitor policies on GM agriculture.<BR><BR><a href="http://www.nature.com/login/scidev_login.taf?ref=/nature/journal/v420/n6917/full/420730a_fs.html" target="_blank" onclick="pageTracker._trackPageview('/tracking/external/'+this.href);" rel="noopener noreferrer">Link to <em>Nature</em> feature article</A><BR><BR>Reference: <em>Nature</em> 420, 730 (2002)</p>

</div>
<div class="quick-links-wrapper">
<h3>You might also like</h3>
[related-articles]
</div>
<p>This article was originally published on <a href="https://www.scidev.net" target="_blank">SciDev.Net</a>. Read the <a href="https://www.scidev.net/global/features/what-2002-did-for-the-gm-debate/" target="_blank">original article</a>.</p>
<script type="text/javascript">
(function(e,t,n,r,i,s,o){e["GoogleAnalyticsObject"]=i;e[i]=e[i]||function(){(e[i].q=e[i].q||[]).push(arguments)},e[i].l=1*new Date;s=t.createElement(n),o=t.getElementsByTagName(n)[0];s.async=1;s.src=r;o.parentNode.insertBefore(s,o)})(window,document,"script","//www.google-analytics.com/ga.js","ga");var _gaq=_gaq||[];var _gaq=_gaq||[];_gaq.push(["_setAccount","UA-3223906-8"],["_trackEvent","article interaction","republished","https://www.scidev.net/global/features/what-2002-did-for-the-gm-debate/",null,true])
</script>
</div>

It has been another year of many disputes in the perennially controversial area of genetically modified (GM) crops.

In this article, Peter Aldous looks back at some of these controversies — from the contested finding that transgenic maize is growing in Mexico, to Zambia’s refusal to accept donations of GM food aid.

Other countries have emerged as proponents of GM over the past year. India, for example, approved commercial planting of GM cotton in March. But doubts remain about the ability of the developing world to monitor policies on GM agriculture.

Link to Nature feature article

Reference: Nature 420, 730 (2002)