| Title |
Debates on Genetically Modified Crops in the Context of Sustainable Development
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Science and Engineering Ethics, June 2015
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s11948-015-9656-y |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Ksenia Gerasimova |
| Abstract |
The paper discusses conflicts in perceptions of GM crops illustrating the complexities of GM debates and applications of the concept of sustainable development. The concept consists of three discourses that both opponents and supporters of GM crops refer to in their analyses: environmentalism, social and economic development and the two sub-issues of sustainable development-biodiversity loss and food security. This creates a unique situation when both proponents and opponents of GM food use the same framework of sustainable development to support their arguments and do not reach a common ground. This will be illustrated by a review of the arguments brought by these two groups. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 90 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 1 | 1% |
| Unknown | 89 | 99% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 23 | 26% |
| Student > Master | 18 | 20% |
| Researcher | 10 | 11% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 5 | 6% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 4 | 4% |
| Other | 12 | 13% |
| Unknown | 18 | 20% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 18 | 20% |
| Social Sciences | 10 | 11% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 9 | 10% |
| Environmental Science | 9 | 10% |
| Economics, Econometrics and Finance | 9 | 10% |
| Other | 16 | 18% |
| Unknown | 19 | 21% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 12. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 12 January 2020.
All research outputs
#2,888,740
of 23,911,072 outputs
Outputs from Science and Engineering Ethics
#244
of 947 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#37,065
of 269,884 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Science and Engineering Ethics
#10
of 27 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,911,072 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 87th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 947 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.3. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 74% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 269,884 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 86% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 27 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 62% of its contemporaries.