EconPapers    
Economics at your fingertips  
 

Defining a safe genetically modified organism: Boundaries of scientific risk assessment

Katherine Barrett and Elisabeth Abergel

Science and Public Policy, 2002, vol. 29, issue 1, 47-58

Abstract: The development and commercialisation of genetically modified (GM) crops continues despite persisting uncertainties regarding environmental impacts. Canada is one of the world's largest producers and exporters of GM crops. Regulators have claimed that existing federal policies for assessing environmental hazards are ‘science-based’ and sufficiently precautionary. We challenge this by examining the scientific data used to approve one variety of GM canola for environmental release. We argue that the legitimacy and plausibility of the regulatory decision rests significantly on boundaries constructed around the definition of a ‘science-based risk assessment’. We advocate a stronger role for the precautionary principle as a regulatory style that recognises the importance of scientific knowledge yet also the limitations and negotiated nature of science, and the need for more open, participatory decision-making processes. Copyright , Beech Tree Publishing.

Date: 2002
References: Add references at CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
http://hdl.handle.net/10.3152/147154302781781128 (application/pdf)
Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:oup:scippl:v:29:y:2002:i:1:p:47-58

Access Statistics for this article

Science and Public Policy is currently edited by Nicoletta Corrocher, Jeong-Dong Lee, Mireille Matt and Nicholas Vonortas

More articles in Science and Public Policy from Oxford University Press
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Oxford University Press ().

 
Page updated 2025-03-19
Handle: RePEc:oup:scippl:v:29:y:2002:i:1:p:47-58