We discuss whether genetic engineering and agroecology are compatible. For this, we investigated three cases of genetically engineered crops and considered agroecology as scientific discipline as well as a social movement. One case was the use of cisgenic modifications to make potato durably resistant to late blight, the second was the use of CRISPR/Cas to make rice resistant to bacterial blight and as a third case, we evaluated experiences with cultivating transgenic Bt crops. These cases demonstrated that genetic engineering offers opportunities to grow crops in novel integrated pest management (IPM) systems with, as direct benefit, a decrease in the use of chemical crop protection agents, and as indirect effect that the role of predators and biological control agents can become more important than in present conventional systems based on pesticides. We used a framework based on four concerns (both cons and pros) that were gathered from an extensive societal interaction organized around the Dutch research project DuRPh, which produced a proof-of-concept of a cisgenic late blight-resistant potato. We concluded that genetic engineering and agroecology certainly have synergy in the context of agroecology as science, when applied to making crops less vulnerable to pests and diseases and when combined with cultivation using IPM. By contrast, within the movement context, genetically engineered varieties may be welcomed if they include traits that contribute to successful IPM schemes and are socially benign. Whether they would actually be deemed desirable or acceptable will, however, vary depending on the norms and values of the social movements. We propose that some concerns may be reconcilable in a dialogue. Deontological arguments such as naturalness are more difficult to reconcile, as they relate to deeply felt ethical or cultural values. A step forward would be when also for these arguments everyone can make an informed choice and when these choices can coexist in a respectful manner.

中文翻译：

---

农业生态学核心的基因工程

我们讨论基因工程和农业生态学是否兼容。为此，我们调查了三个转基因作物案例，并将农业生态学视为科学学科和社会运动。一个案例是使用顺基因修饰使马铃薯对晚疫病具有持久抗性，第二个案例是使用 CRISPR/Cas 使水稻对白叶枯病具有抗性，作为第三个案例，我们评估了培育转基因 Bt 作物的经验。这些案例表明，基因工程提供了在新型综合虫害管理 (IPM) 系统中种植作物的机会，其直接好处是减少了化学作物保护剂的使用，并且作为间接影响，捕食者和生物控制剂的作用可能变得比目前基于杀虫剂的传统系统更重要。我们使用了一个基于四个关注点（利弊）的框架，这些关注点是从围绕荷兰研究项目 DuRPh 组织的广泛社会互动中收集到的，该项目产生了抗顺生晚疫病马铃薯的概念验证。我们得出的结论是，基因工程和农业生态学在农业生态学作为科学的背景下肯定具有协同作用，当应用于使作物不易受到病虫害的影响以及与使用 IPM 的栽培相结合时。相比之下，在运动背景下，如果基因工程品种包括有助于成功 IPM 计划的特征并且对社会有益，则可能会受到欢迎。然而，它们是否真的被认为是可取的或可接受的，取决于社会运动的规范和价值观。我们建议一些关切可以在对话中调和。自然性等道义论的论点更难以调和，因为它们与深切感受到的道德或文化价值观有关。向前迈出的一步是，对于这些论点，每个人都可以做出明智的选择，并且这些选择可以以尊重的方式共存。