London, United Kingdom
December 2, 2013

The past decade and more of the GM controversy has witnessed a major interaction between technology and society. Whatever the eventual outcome, there are many lessons to be learned from the GM issue about how (and how not) to introduce a new technology as well as whether (or not) it may be wise to do so. It will be an important subject for future as well as contemporary study but much will be lost if records and ephemera of all sorts are not retained under safe conditions; one cannot know in advance what will be needed in future so it will be best to keep as much as possible.

It was therefore agreed in 2008 that CropGen, in collaboration with the Science Museum in London, would establish an archive of material relevant to the GM crops and foods debate, encompassing all shades of opinion from the most enthusiastic proponents to the most determined opponents so that all arguments and all points of view are preserved. The intention was to establish a resource base for the on-going and future study of the GM phenomenon as one of major interaction between science and society. Everything of interest (paper, film, tape, disk, websites, equipment, etc.) would be eligible for inclusion except for biological material (living or dead) for which there would not be proper storage facilities.

The original intention was that the archive should be international, really encompassing the whole world. A visit to possible contributors in the US and Canada late in 2009 showed the impossibility of achieving that enormous prospect; it was agreed that it would be more sensible to focus, at least in the first instance, on the UK.

Before material had been thrown away (and some is already being or has been discarded), the hope was to secure the collaboration of everyone involved, including scientists and fellow academics, industry, farming interests, government, campaigners, the media and others in order to assemble relevant material.

That has not been unsuccessful. An extensive collection of material from UK donors has been assembled for archiving at the Science Museum. In the course of doing so it became clear that many archives containing material of GM relevance were already in existence although not specifically identified as being GM: DEFRA in the UK is one via the National Archives in which records of the Farm Scale Evaluations are held (1). In the US, the FDA, EPA and USDA all have relevant material. Non-confidential records from Monsanto are housed by Washington University in St. Louis (2); other seed companies have expressed interest in doing the same but have pled a lack of resources. Note also the EFB Ask-Force resource (3).

In addition, some websites are being archived on an ongoing basis: in the UK it is being done by the British Library (4) where, for example, the CropGen (5), Soil Association (6), GM Freeze (7) and Rothamsted Research (8) websites may be found. The most extensive source of international website archives is the WayBackMachine (9) which, at he time of writing, notes that 368 billion web pages have been saved over time. Rich resources indeed.

The Science Museum archive is expected to open for use some time in 2014: the material so far collected from UK sources will all have been delivered by early in January and it will than be a matter of cataloguing and organising the many metres of shelf space which the archive will occupy. In principle, the archive will remain open for further contributions; anyone interested should contact Celia Cassingham, Archivist, Science Museum Library and Archives, Science Museum at Wroughton, Hackpen Lane, Wroughton, Swindon SN4 9NS; tel: +44-(0)-1793-846223; E-mail: Cecilia.Cassingham@ScienceMuseum.org.uk

How researchers and others will in fifty or a hundred years’ time regard the early 21st century GM debate is at present a matter for pure speculation: were we crazy to spend so many years nit-picking or has it turned out to be a wise precaution? Only time will tell but, at least for the UK, there will be real evidence on which to base conclusions. Hopefully colleagues elsewhere will follow this example and take steps to establish GM archives around the world. In time one might hope that everything will be digitised and available online but there is a long way to go before that happy state is within sight.

So to colleagues: throw nothing away and take steps to contribute what you have either to an existing archive or encourage one to be set up for your own country.

Sources:

1. The National Archives 14.5.07). DEFRA Environmental Protection: The Farm Scale Evaluations (http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20080306073937/http:/www.defra.gov.uk/environment/gm/fse)

2. Hadley Davis (15.8.12). New and Notable: Monsanto Company Records (accrual). Washington University Archives (http://wulibraries.typepad.com/bears_repeating/2012/08/new-and-notable-monsanto-accrual.html)

3. Klaus Ammann (no date). EFB Ask-Force: Message from Klaus Ammann, Moderator of the EFB ASK-FORCE. European Federation of Biotechnology (http://www.efb-central.org/Biodiversity/askforce.html)

4. UK Web Archive (http://www.webarchive.org.uk/ukwa/)

5. UK Web Archive. CropGen website archived (http://www.webarchive.org.uk/ukwa/target/31653891/source/search)

6. UK Web Archive. Soil Association website archived (http://www.webarchive.org.uk/ukwa/target/131527/source/search)

7. UK Web Archive. GM Freeze website archived (http://www.webarchive.org.uk/ukwa/target/54067218/source/search)

8. UK Web Archive. Rothamsted Research website archived (http://www.webarchive.org.uk/ukwa/target/132838/source/search)

9. WayBackMachine (http://archive.org/web)

Website: http://www.cropgen.org./index.html

Published: December 3, 2013