Post-Sustainable Development

The past 15 years have witnessed the rise of post-development theory as a means of understanding the development discourse since the 1940s. Post-development argues that intentional development (as distinct from immanent development - what people are doing anyway) is a construct of Western hegemony. Sustainable development, they argue, is no different and indeed is perhaps worse, given that most of the global environmental degradation has been driven by consumerism and industrialization in the West. Critics of post-development counter by stating that it only provides destruction by tearing apart what is currently practiced in 'development' without providing an alternative. When post-developmentalists do offer an alternative it typically amouints to little more than a call for more grassroots involvement in development and disengagement from a Western agenda. Post-sustainable development analysis and counter-analysis has received remarkably little attention within the sustainable development literature, yet this paper argues that it can make a positive contributrion by calling for an analysis of discourse rather than a hiding of power differentials and an assumption that consensus must exist within a community. A case is made for a post-sustainable development that acknowledges that diversity will exist and consensus may not be achievable, but at the same time participation can help with learning. The role of the expert within sustainable development is also discussed. Copyright (C) 2008 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd and ERP Environment.

Isolating the 'farmer' effect as a component of the advantage of growing genetically modified varieties in developing countries: a Bt cotton case study from Jalgaon, India

The present paper explores the 'farmer' effect in economic advantages often claimed for Bt cotton varieties (those with the endotoxin gene from Bacillus thuringiensis conferring resistance to some insect pests) compared to non-Bt varieties. Critics claim that much of the yield advantage of Bt cotton could be due to the fact that farmers adopting the technology are in a better position to provide inputs and management and so much of any claimed Bt advantage is an artefact rather than reflecting a real advantage of the variety per se. The present paper provides an in-depth analysis of 63 non-adopting and 94 adopting households of Bt cotton in Jalgaon, Maharashtra State, India, spanning the seasons 2002 and 2003. Results suggest that Bt adopters are indeed different from non-adopters in a number of ways. Adopters appear to specialize more on cotton (at least in terms of the land area they devote to the crop), spend more money on irrigation and grow well-performing non-Bt varieties of cotton (Bunny). Taking gross margin as the basis for comparison, Bt plots had 2.5 times the gross margin of non-Bt plots in both seasons. If only adopters are considered then the gross margin advantage of Bt plots reduces to 1.6 times that of non-Bt plots. This is still a significant advantage and could well explain the popularity of Bt in Maharashtra. However, it is clear that great care needs to be taken with such comparative studies.

Isolating the 'farmer' effect as a component of the advantage of growing genetically modified varieties in developing countries: a Bt cotton case study from Jalgaon, India

The present paper explores the 'farmer' effect in economic advantages often claimed for Bt cotton varieties (those with the endotoxin gene from Bacillus thuringiensis conferring resistance to some insect pests) compared to non-Bt varieties. Critics claim that much of the yield advantage of Bt cotton could be due to the fact that farmers adopting the technology are in a better position to provide inputs and management and so much of any claimed Bt advantage is an artefact rather than reflecting a real advantage of the variety per se. The present paper provides an in-depth analysis of 63 non-adopting and 94 adopting households of Bt cotton in Jalgaon, Maharashtra State, India, spanning the seasons 2002 and 2003. Results suggest that Bt adopters are indeed different from non-adopters in a number of ways. Adopters appear to specialize more on cotton (at least in terms of the land area they devote to the crop), spend more money on irrigation and grow well-performing non-Bt varieties of cotton (Bunny). Taking gross margin as the basis for comparison, Bt plots had 2.5 times the gross margin of non-Bt plots in both seasons. If only adopters are considered then the gross margin advantage of Bt plots reduces to 1.6 times that of non-Bt plots. This is still a significant advantage and could well explain the popularity of Bt in Maharashtra. However, it is clear that great care needs to be taken with such comparative studies.

Inequality and GM crops: a case study of Bt cotton in India

Critics of genetically modified (GM) crops often contend that their introduction enhances the gap between rich and poor farmers, as the former group are in the best position to afford the expensive seed as well as provide other inputs such as fertilizer and irrigation. The research reported in this paper explores this issue with regard to Bt cotton (cotton with the endotoxtin gene from Bacillus thuringiensis conferring resistance to some insect pests) in Jalgaon, Maharashtra State, India, spanning the 2002 and 2003 seasons. Questionnaire–based survey results from 63 non–adopting and 94 adopting households of Bt cotton were analyzed, spanning 137 Bt cotton plots and 95 non–Bt cotton plots of both Bt adopters and non–adopters. For these households, cotton income accounted for 85 to 88% of total household income, and is thus of vital importance. Results suggest that in 2003 Bt adopting households have significantly more income from cotton than do non–adopting households (Rp 66,872 versus Rp 46,351) but inequality in cotton income, measured with the Gini coefficient (G), was greater amongst non–adopters than adopters. While Bt adopters had greater acreage of cotton in 2003 (9.92 acres versus 7.42 for non–adopters), the respective values of G were comparable. The main reason for the lessening of inequality amongst adopters would appear to be the consistency in the performance of Bt cotton along with the preferred non–Bt cultivar of Bt adopters—Bunny. Taking gross margin as the basis for comparison, Bt plots had 2.5 times the gross margin of non–Bt plots of non–adopters, while the advantage of Bt plots over non–Bt plots of adopters was 1.6 times. Measured in terms of the Gini coefficient of gross margin/acre it was apparent that inequality was lessened with the adoption of Bunny (G = 0.47) and Bt (G = 0.3) relative to all other non–Bt plots (G = 0.63). Hence the issue of equality needs to be seen both in terms of differences between adopters and non–adopters as well as within each of the groups.

Ted Hughes: the development of a children's poet

This article looks at how Ted Hughes' poetry for children developed over more than 30 years of publication. It traces the movement from his earlier, more conventional rhyming poems, such as Meet My Folks! (1961) and Nessie the Mannerless Monster (1964), to the mature, free verse "animal poems" for older readers of Season Songs (1976c), Under the North Star (1981) and the "farmyard fable" What is the Truth? (1984). The article argues that the later lyrical poems for younger readers where Hughes returned to rhyme, The Cat and the Cuckoo (1987) and The Mermaid's Purse (1993), represent an undervalued final phase of Hughes' work for children which is rarely discussed by critics. The discussion considers Hughes' changing attitude to the concept of the "children's poet" at different periods of his career. Reference is made throughout to Hughes' own writing about children and poetry, such as Poetry in the Making (1967), and to parallel developments in his poetry for adults.