IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/scippl/v32y2005i4p277-284.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Austria's agri-biotechnology regulation: political consensus despite divergent concepts of precaution

Author

Listed:
  • Helge Torgersen
  • Alexander Bogner

Abstract

The invocation of the precautionary principle, for instance, to prohibit the commercialisation of genetically modified crops in Austria, has been criticised for blurring the boundaries between science and politics. Three different understandings of precaution arise in the policy process around this case, and in the relevant actors' view of precaution and the perceived relationship between science and politics. The dominant ‘political- economic’ understanding has emphasised uncertainty about benefits and thus effectively reversed the burden of evidence. This was done without overtly shifting or challenging the boundary between science and politics, though their relative priority was reversed. The Austrian policy offers a pragmatic means to gain room for manoeuvre, rather than a coherent approach for a more reflexive way to deal with a controversial technology. Copyright , Beech Tree Publishing.

Suggested Citation

  • Helge Torgersen & Alexander Bogner, 2005. "Austria's agri-biotechnology regulation: political consensus despite divergent concepts of precaution," Science and Public Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 32(4), pages 277-284, August.
  • Handle: RePEc:oup:scippl:v:32:y:2005:i:4:p:277-284
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.3152/147154305781779407
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:oup:scippl:v:32:y:2005:i:4:p:277-284. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Oxford University Press (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://academic.oup.com/spp .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.