IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/ids/ijgenv/v5y2005i1-2p10-35.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Perspectives on precaution: the role of policymakers in dealing with the uncertainties of agricultural biotechnology

Author

Listed:
  • Dane Scott

Abstract

From 1999 to 2004, the European Union had in place a moratorium on new genetically modified (GM) products. This moratorium created a tense trade dispute between the United States and the EU. While the moratorium has now been lifted, differences remain between the EU's and US's approach to GM products. The essence of the conflict involves differing approaches to the rate of technological transfer. The US advocates a rapid rate of technological transfer, while the EU advocates a slow and cautious rate. The EU's "proceed slowly" approach is grounded in the controversial precautionary principle (PP). Crudely, the PP places the burden of proof on the developers of new technologies like GM to show that their products do not pose a threat to human health or the environment. While the PP has grown in influence in Europe over the last three decades policymakers in the US have largely rejected it. The following enquiry will examine the justifications for these conflicting perspectives on precaution toward technological transfer of GM, or transgenic research. The ultimate goal is to shed light on the role of policymakers in dealing with the uncertainties associated with this new and powerful technology.

Suggested Citation

  • Dane Scott, 2005. "Perspectives on precaution: the role of policymakers in dealing with the uncertainties of agricultural biotechnology," International Journal of Global Environmental Issues, Inderscience Enterprises Ltd, vol. 5(1/2), pages 10-35.
  • Handle: RePEc:ids:ijgenv:v:5:y:2005:i:1/2:p:10-35
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.inderscience.com/link.php?id=6260
    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.

    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:ids:ijgenv:v:5:y:2005:i:1/2:p:10-35. 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: Sarah Parker (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.inderscience.com/browse/index.php?journalID=14 .

    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.