COLUMBIA, Mo. (AP) —
The gap between federal support for agricultural research at large
public universities and private investment continues to grow — and the
divide comes with increased threats to academic freedom and more
instances of meddling in the lab, a new research report suggests.
A
recent study by Food and Water Watch, a Washington-based environmental
group, shows that nearly one-quarter of the money spent on agricultural
research at land-grant universities comes from corporations, trade
associations and foundations, an all-time high. Financial support from
the U.S. Department of Agriculture accounts for less than 15 percent,
the lowest level in nearly two decades.
The consumer advocacy
group's report is rife with what it calls examples of how corporate
money "corrupts" the public research mission at land-grant schools,
which were created by the Morrill Act of 1862. The law provided federal
land for states to establish agriculture and engineering colleges.
The
examples range from a University of Georgia food safety program that
allows industry groups to join an advisory board in exchange for annual
$20,000 donations, to an Ohio State University professor whose research
on genetically modified sunflowers was blocked by two seed companies
after the initial results suggested the biotech sunflowers fostered the
growth of weeds.
The report, entitled "Public Research, Private
Gain," also explores the blurry lines created when universities and
industry work hand-in-hand, such as when South Dakota State University
sued farmers over wheat seed patents as part of a public-private
coalition formed with a Monsanto Co. subsidiary. The Missouri-based
company is known for aggressive litigation against what it calls seed
piracy. Kansas State University, Colorado State and Texas A&M have
pursued similar lawsuits.
Such alliances are a far cry from
land-grant universities' historic role in promoting public knowledge and
freely sharing the fruits of their research, said Patty Lovara, Food
and Water Watch's assistant director. The report notes that publicly
funded university research led to the domestication of blueberries,
early varieties of high-yield hybrid corn and common tools to fight soil
erosion.
"There's a real sense in agriculture of what these
schools used to be," Lovara said. "There was much more trust in what
they put out. This is not the same research system of decades ago, and
we're acting like it is."
Deans at several agricultural schools
singled out for criticism in the report maintained that while corporate
support is vital, it's unlikely to sway research results or even
influence what research gets done.
"We're kind of caught between a
rock and a hard place," said Thomas Payne, dean of the College of
Agriculture, Food and Natural Resources at the University of Missouri.
"In order for research to continue, we have to have support from a
variety of sources."
Payne said industry support accounts for just
5 percent of the agricultural research budget at Missouri — though the
Food and Water Watch report notes that the percentages were
significantly higher in the university's plant sciences department (42
percent from 2007 to 2010) and its College of Veterinary Medicine (63
percent from 2004 to 2010).
Monsanto plays a prominent role on the
Missouri campus, where science students attend lectures in Monsanto
Auditorium — built in part with a $950,000 grant from the St. Louis
company — and professors spin their university research off into private
companies at the Monsanto Place "life sciences business incubator,"
which was built with the help of a $2 million corporate grant.
The
company and others in food and agriculture production have given
substantial sums to other universities as well. There's a $1 million
Monsanto Student Services Wing at Iowa State University's College of
Agriculture and Life Sciences, and a $250,000 endowed Monsanto chair in
agricultural communications at the University of Illinois.
Cargill
Inc. donated $10 million more than a decade ago for naming rights on a
plant genomics building at the University of Minnesota, while two
sensory labs at Purdue carry the imprimaturs of the Kroger Co. and
ConAgra Foods Inc.
While the Food and Water Watch report suggests
spending millions of dollars on building naming rights may also buy
access to key decision makers, the donors and university officials say
that's not true.
"In our experience, there is no correlation
between naming rights and university research," Monsanto spokeswoman
Sara Miller said.
Another Monsanto spokeswoman, Kelli Powers, said
the company "is proud of its contributions to land-grant universities
and support of university agricultural research," whether through naming
rights or student scholarships.
Michael Doyle, a professor of
food microbiology at Georgia and director of its Center for Food Safety,
rejected the notion that companies such as Cargill, ConAgra and the
Coca-Cola Co. unduly influence the center's research agenda when they
buy seats on the Board of Advisors.
"Industry does not tell me how
to spend that money," he said, noting that corporate support accounts
for just 10 percent of the program's research budget. "But I ask the
industry, 'What are the areas you are interested in?'"
Those
interests range from pathogen control to insider access to scientists
and regulators from the Atlanta-based Centers for Disease Control.
Corporate partners are promised "special consideration" by Center for
Food Safety faculty members, and the center's website reassures industry
members that a prying press isn't allowed to attend those discussions.
"What
we're trying to do is come up with practical ways the industry can make
our food safer," Doyle added. "It's not specific to a company ...
Sometimes the research doesn't work out the way the industry wants. We
don't hold back."
With the current five-year farm bill set to
expire at the end of September, Food and Water Watch wants Congress to
boost the federal investment in campus agricultural research, with more
resources steered toward sustainable methods, organic farming and
reduced use of pesticides. The group also is calling for land-grant
universities to more fully disclose gifts by private donors and wants
agricultural research journals to adopt more stringent
conflict-of-interest rules, similar to the recent crackdown by medical
journals.
"This is a conversation that needs to be had about how
we support this research," Lovara said. "There are a lot of
consequences of land grant-funding of industry research that haven't
been examined."
___
Online:
Food and Water Watch report, bit.ly/lhSATj
___
Alan Scher Zagier can be reached at http://twitter.com/azagier
Copyright 2012 The Associated Press.