Summary : IRRI hopes that its first field test of transgenic rice will convince the public of the benignity and benefits of biotechnology, and its has selected a variety of transgenic rice that it believes will not arouse hostility. But scratch a little at the surface, and the field test and the transgenic variety become perfect examples of everything that is wrong with technology and IRRI's biotech program in general. BB rice is not a long-term solution to bacterial blight. It is another finger in a leaky dam that IRRI has evidently no real desire to fix. IRRI has not shown a genuine interest in sustainable solutions to the disease - not when it first introduced HYVs in Asia and not now as it begins its large-scale promotion of hybrid rice and "super rice", both with severe susceptibility to the disease. The field test also demonstrates the ways in which IRRI turns inward to shelter itself from scrutiny and a broader vision. to date, the process behind the field test lacks transparency and proper mechanisms for public input. There has been no meaningful discussion of the benefits to farmers or of how the technology could even reach them. But, once again, farmers are not the reason for the field test. The issue here is biotechnology and the field test is a means to push biotechnology forward in the region. IRRI has no mandate to push the biotech envelope in Asia or anywhere else for that matter. While it may hide behind its national counterparts and unrepresentative agencies such as the IRRI IBC, it remains unaccountable to farmers in the South. The issue of accountability is particularly problematic with biotechnology, as techniques like genetic engineering carry far-reaching social and economic risks. There will be an unavoidable increase in corporate control of rice, with deep implications for the region. Small farmers have the least to gain from this technology and, actually, the most to lose. And they are the ones most marginalized from the decision-making process.