ABSTRACT
The debate about environmental aspects of the genetically modified (GM) soy production model in Argentina has been weak, given the overwhelming public acceptance of the technological package as a development strategy. The biotechnology hegemony thesis presented by Newell (2009) states that such a situation is due to the dominance of an agribusiness elite that has effectively excluded opposition, especially environmental considerations, through persuading public opinion at all levels. Moreover, the argument of the existence of such hegemony is based on how the agribusiness elite use their resources (material, institutional and discursive) to influence the Argentinean government. The biotechnology hegemony thesis, however, overlooks significant aspects about the agribusiness elites’ features. First, it does not address properly the variety and thus difference between different subgroups of elites within the agribusiness elite. And thus, second, it does not reflect the range of dynamics that exist between these elites as they interact with the government. By presenting a more nuanced analysis of the agribusiness elite, several aspects about the dynamics created by the interaction of different actors in the environmental governance of the soy sector are made visible and their differences are better addressed. Our findings show that it is possible to distinguish interesting attitudes, discourses and/or type of decisions about which and when certain subgroups of the agribusiness elite have a different position on the environmental debate. Furthermore, we find different points of consensus that have been developed between the different elites within the agribusiness elite and the government about key issues related to the soy sector. We thus offer a more detailed perspective allowing an analysis about crucial features of environmental governance related to GM soy production in Argentina. This chapter will focus specifically on the relationship between the Kirchner administrations and the elites related to the GM soy model. The arguments presented here are based on a review of secondary sources and on fieldwork conducted in the region of Santa Fe during 2012. The research is supported by interviews with researchers located in Buenos Aires and representatives of Argentinean agricultural organizations.
