From ‘mad cow’ crisis to synthetic biology: challenges to EU regulation of GMOs beyond the European context

Artem Anyshchenko () and Jennifer Yarnold
Additional contact information
Artem Anyshchenko: The University of Queensland
Jennifer Yarnold: The University of Queensland

International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics, 2021, vol. 21, issue 3, No 4, 404 pages

Abstract: Abstract This paper provides a historical and legal perspective of EU regulation on genetically modified organisms (GMOs)—through its initial development to its current position—in view of major advancements of modern molecular biotechnologies used for agriculture. We argue that the emergence and development of EU regulation of GMOs were shaped by antecedent events, notably bovine spongiform encephalopathy (BSE) or ‘mad cow disease’ and the public fears that ensued around food safety. These regulatory emergencies were a key factor prompting national governments and EU institutions to work out the framework for the application of the precautionary principle to agricultural biotechnology. Moreover, while modern biotechnology techniques eliminate many of the perceived health and safety risks of earlier predecessors, the EU regulatory framework has been slow to keep up, lacking the proper regulatory tools that allow for a balanced policy approach towards the techniques underlying genome editing and synthetic biology. Difference in approaches to the regulation of GMOs between the EU and US, to a large extent, precipitated the transatlantic conflict over agricultural biotechnology. Specifically, a significant incompatibility between the application of the precautionary principle in the EU and the substantial equivalence in the US to assess GM food and feed risk was the main reason for the international trade dispute. The ruling of the Court of Justice of the European Union that genome editing techniques will not be warranted exemption from authorisation process suggests that EU policy on agricultural biotechnology is likely to remain stringent. This may complicate the progress of synthetic biology and render the EU vulnerable to future food security and economic contingencies.

Keywords: Agricultural biotechnology; Gene editing; Synthetic biology; European union; WTO law; Genetically modified organisms (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2021
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s10784-020-09516-1 Abstract (text/html)
Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.

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:spr:ieaple:v:21:y:2021:i:3:d:10.1007_s10784-020-09516-1

Ordering information: This journal article can be ordered from
http://www.springer.com/economics/journal/10784

DOI: 10.1007/s10784-020-09516-1

Access Statistics for this article

International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics is currently edited by Joyeeta Gupta

More articles in International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics from Springer
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Sonal Shukla () and Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing ().