Short bio:

The history of "safety duplication" within and across seed banks as the go-to strategy for conserving crop genetic diversity offers an opportunity to reflect on the history of backup—a Cold War compulsion turned cheap failsafe for a neoliberal age—and its present hazards as a conservation measure.

Additional details:

Contemporary efforts to salvage endangered crop diversity in seed and gene banks emphasize "safety duplication" as a key strategy. Important collections of seeds or other genetic materials are copied, in whole or part, and sent to physically distant sites to provide a backup in the case of local disaster. At the same time, undetected or unnecessary duplication within and across seed banks seen is as a threat. Since the 1980s, researchers have described "rationalization" of collections as an urgent need, and devised systems for rooting out unwanted duplication in the name of increased efficiency. My research grapples with this paradox. As I show, the ascent of safety duplication in seed banks cannot be understood apart from anxieties about social, political, and cultural survival during the Cold War and amidst catastrophic environmental change. Cold war catastrophism does not explain all, however. The dichotomization of wanted from unwanted redundancy bears the distinct mark of neoliberal reorganization. After years of urgent salvage of endangered seeds, state-funded seed banks found themselves under pressure to reduce expenditures, including even if it meant culling collections of the same resources they'd labored to protect. This history invites reflection on the history of backup as a Cold War compulsion turned turned cheap failsafe for a neoliberal age. It also calls attention to the hazards of safety duplication—that is, of establishing conditions for security that valorize copying as a solution instead of addressing the root causes of insecurity.