Monsanto on why corporations work with academics

The GLP aggregated and excerpted this blog/article to reflect the diversity of news, opinion and analysis.

Unless you’ve worked in academia, it might be unclear how and why companies like Monsanto collaborate with university professors. The greatest reason for collaboration is that our knowledge is complementary and produces outcomes that benefit society.

Does Monsanto pay professors?

We don’t pay professors as direct compensation. But like many companies, we sometimes fund a professor’s research program or outreach.

Are academics saying good things about GMOs just because Monsanto is funding them?

A recent Pew Research Center study found that 88% of scientists believe GM foods are safe. Scientists are trained to communicate based on well-founded scientific evidence. When scientists agree or disagree, it is about the quality of the science, not about the source of funding.

Does Monsanto use academics to lobby government officials?

We don’t have any professors working for us as lobbyists. But, government officials often want to hear about the safety of our products from experts outside Monsanto. We identify independent experts, oftentimes well known leaders in their field of study and highly respected by their peers, to communicate to public officials and society.  In every such case, we thoroughly follow the laws to ensure our efforts are transparent, appropriate and legal.

Why should I trust academic research that a company helped pay for?

To succeed as a professor, you need a reputation for conducting research that’s trustworthy. I’ve never met a reputable professor who would risk their professional reputation by letting their funding sources distort their research findings. Research at universities is often funded by outside sources, including companies, and the government. A professor unable to conduct objective research regardless of funding source wouldn’t maintain their credibility.

Read full, original post: Why Does Monsanto Work with Academics?

{{ reviewsTotal }}{{ options.labels.singularReviewCountLabel }}
{{ reviewsTotal }}{{ options.labels.pluralReviewCountLabel }}
{{ options.labels.newReviewButton }}
{{ userData.canReview.message }}

Related Articles

Infographic: Global regulatory and health research agencies on whether glyphosate causes cancer

Infographic: Global regulatory and health research agencies on whether glyphosate causes cancer

Does glyphosate—the world's most heavily-used herbicide—pose serious harm to humans? Is it carcinogenic? Those issues are of both legal and ...

Most Popular

Screenshot-2026-05-01-at-1.29.41-PM
Viewpoint: What happens when whole grains meet modern food manufacturing? Labels don’t tell the whole story.
S
As vaccine rejectionism spreads, measles may be taking a more dangerous turn
ChatGPT-Image-Apr-13-2026-02_20_22-PM
Viewpoint: Misinformation infodemic? Why assessing evidence is so challenging 
Screenshot-2026-04-20-at-2.26.27-PM
Viewpoint — Food-fear world: The latest activist scientists campaign: Cancer-causing additives
ChatGPT-Image-Mar-27-2026-11_47_30-AM-2
FDA’s expedited drug reviews are hailed in some quarters but other approval practices are problematic
Screenshot-2026-03-13-at-12.14.04-PM
The FDA wants to make many popular prescription drugs OTC—a great idea. Here’s why it’s unlikely to happen
bigstock opioids on chalkboard with rol
GLP podcast: 'Safe injection sites': enabling drug addiction or saving lives?
circular-bioeconomy-should-focus-on-sustainable-wellbeing
GLP podcast: What's wrong with 'doomsday' environmentalism? It's false.
Farmers can talk to plants
Farmers are a major source of misinformation—about farming
Screenshot-2026-04-12-135256
Bixonimania: The fake disease scam that AI swallowed whole

Sorry. No data so far.

glp menu logo outlined

Get news on human & agricultural genetics and biotechnology delivered to your inbox.