Technological revolution meets policy and the market: Explaining cross-national differences in agricultural biotechnology regulation

European Journal of Political Research

Volumn 42, Issue 5, 2003, Pages 643-683

  Bernauer, Thomas ^a   Meins, Erika ^b  

^a ETH ZURICH   (Switzerland)

^b NONE

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 0141884237     PISSN: 03044130     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/1475-6765.00099     Document Type: Article

References (87)

1. ACGA (2000). Corn growers question need to sacrifice export markets due to genetically modified crops. Available online at: http://www.acga.org.
2. Assouline, G. (1996). European industry strategies in biotechnology. Biotechnology and Development Monitor (26): 10-12.
3. Baker, K. (1999). Encouraging innovation in European agricultural biotechnology. AgroFood-Industry Hi-Tech (September/October): 29-32.
4. Barling, D. (1995). The European Community and the legislating of the application and products of genetic modification technology. Environmental Politics 4(3): 467-474.
5. Baron, D.P. (2000). Business and its environment. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
6. Behrens, M., Meyer-Stumborg, S. & Simonis, G. (1997). Gen food: Einführung und Verbreitung, Konflikte und Gestaltungsmöglichkeiten. Berlin: Ed. Stigma.
7. Bernauer, T. (2002). The global politics of green biotechnology, (unpublished manuscript). Center for International Studies, Swiss Federal Institute of Technology.
8. BEUC (1999). GM food and the European consumer. Paper presented at the 8th Annual European Food Law Conference, 23 June, Brussels, Belgium.
9. Bijman, J. (1995). Strategies of US biotechnology companies. Biotechnology and Development Monitor (24): 12-16.
10. Biliouri, D. (1999). Environmental NGOs in Brussels: How powerful are their lobbying activities? Environmental Politics 8(2): 173-182.
11. Bonior, D. (1999). Letter to FDA. Available online at: http://www.purefood.org/ge/ cong49label.cfm.
12. Caduff, L. (2001). Die Erklärung unterschiedlicher Regulierungsstandards im Bereich des Verbraucherschutzes - Ein Vergleich zwischen der Europäischen Union und den USA am Beispiel von Wachstumshormonen in der Fleischproduktion. (Master's thesis). Center for International Studies, University of Zurich.
13. Cantley, M.F. (1995). The regulation of modern biotechnology: An historical and European perspective: A case study in how societies cope with new knowledge in the last quarter of the twentieth century, in H.-J. Rehm & G. Reed (eds.), Biotechnology: Legal, economic and ethical dimensions. Weinheim: VCH Verlagsgesellschaft, pp. 505-681.
14. Carpenter, J.E. & Gianessi, L.P. (2001). Agricultural biotechnology: Updated benefit estimates. Available online at: http://www.ncfap.org.
15. Caswell, J.A. (1998). Should use of genetically modified organisms be labeled? AgBioForum 1(1): 22-24.
16. Caswell, J.A. (2000). Labeling policy for GMOs: To each his own? AgBioForum 3(1): 305-309.
17. Center for Science in the Public Interest (1998). Food labeling for the 21st century: A global agenda for action. Washington, DC: Center for the Public Interest.
18. Chege, N. (1998). Compulsory labeling of food produced from genetically modified soya beans and maize. Columbia Journal of Europe Law 4(Winter/Spring): 179-181.
19. Chen, Z. & McDermott, A. (1998). International comparisons of biotechnology policies. Journal of Consumer Policy 21(4): 527-550.
20. Covello, V.T., Sandman, P. & Slovic, P. (1991). Guidelines for communicating information about chemical risks effectively and responsibly, in D.G. Mayo & R.D, Hollander (eds.), Acceptable evidence: Science and values in risk management. New York: Oxford University Press, pp. 95-118.
21. Cummins, R. (1998). Monsanto under attack. Available online at: http://www.purefood.org.
22. Dann, C. (2000). From boom to bust in three seasons: The rapid rise and fall of GE markets. Available online at: http://www.connectotel.com/gmfood.
23. Echols, M.A. (1998). Food safety regulation in the European Union and the United States: Different cultures, different laws. Columbia Journal of European Law 4(Summer): 525-543.
24. Egdell, J.M. & Thomson, K.J. (1999). The influence of UK NGOs on the Common Agricultural Policy. Journal of Common Market Studies 37(1): 121-131.
25. Epstein, R. (1996). Why genetically engineered food should be labeled. Available online at: http://userwww.sfsul.edu.
26. Eurobarometer 52.1 (2000). The Europeans and biotechnology. Brussels: INRA.
27. EuropaBio (1999a). GMO fact sheet. Available online at: http://www.europa-bio.be.
28. EuropaBio (1999b). Press release: European bioindustries are in favor of consumer choice. Brussels: EuropaBio.
29. European Report (1997). Transgenic maize: Green MEPs condemn companies for refusing to label GMO presence. 13 December.
30. FDA (1994). Biotechnology of food. Washington, DC: Center for Food Safety and Applied Nutrition.
31. FDA (1999). Biotechnology in the year 2000 and beyond: Public meeting. Chicago, IL: FDA.
32. FDA (2000). Report on consumer focus groups on biotechnology. Washington, DC: FDA.
33. Feedstuffs (1999). Attention on GM grains: Oilseeds becomes issue of acceptance. 4 October.
34. Fernandez-Cornejo, I (1999). Farm-level effects of adopting genetically engineered crops in the US. Paper presented at Transitions in Agritech: Economics of Strategy and Policy, 24-25 June, Washington DC.
35. Food Labeling News (1998a). Future of GM food in Europe said to rest with food industry persuasion. 1 July.
36. Food Labeling News (1998b). Monsanto changes stand on labeling genetically modified food in EU. 13 May 13.
37. Foster, J. (2001). The causes, costs, and benefits of regulatory diversity, (unpublished manuscript). Massachusetts Institute of Technology.
38. Frewer, L.J., Hedderley, D. & Howard, C. (1997). 'Objection' mapping in determining group and individual concerns regarding genetic engineering. Agricultural and Human Values (1997): 1-13.
39. Frey, B.S. & Kirchgässner, G. (1994). Demokratische Wirtschaftspolitik. München: Vahlen.
40. Friedman, M. (1991). Consumer boycotts: A conceptual framework and research agenda. Journal of Social Issues 47(4): 149-168.
41. Gaskell, G. & Bauer, M.W. (2001). Biotechnology 1996-2000: The years of controversy. London: Science Museum.
42. Gormley, W.T. (1986). Regulatory issue networks in a federal system. Polity 18: 595-620.
43. Greenwood, J. & Ronit, K. (1995). European bioindustry. in J. Greenwood (ed.), European casebook on business alliances. Kernel Hempstead: Prentice-Hall.
44. Groth, E. (1994). Consumer perceptions of and responses to potentially hazardous technologies, in ICGFI (ed.), ICGFI document no. 18. Vienna: ICGFI Secretary.
45. Hall, P. & Taylor, R. (1996). Political science and the three new institutionalisms. Political Studies (44): 936-957.
46. Harlander, S. (1991). Social, moral and ethical issues in food biotechnology. Food Technology 45(5): 152-161.
47. Hoban, T. (1997). Consumer acceptance of biotechnology: An international perspective. Nature Biotechnology 15: 233.
48. Hoban, T. (1998). Trends in consumer attitudes about agricultural biotechnology. AgBioForum 1(1): 3-7.
49. Holla, R. (1995). Safety issues in genetic engineering: Regulation in the United States and the European Communities, in M. Fransman, G. Junne & A. Roobeek (eds.), The biotechnology revolution? Oxford: Blackwell.
50. IATP Food Safety & Health (1999). Monsanton and the Clinton Administration. 12 April.
51. Jany, K.-D. & Greiner, R. (1998). Kennzeichnung von genetisch veränderten Lebensmitteln. Available online at: http://www.dainnet.de/bfe.
52. Jasanoff, S. (1995). Product, process or programme: Three cultures and the regulation of biotechnology, in M. Bauer (ed.), Resistance to new technology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
53. Jasanoff, S. (1999). Learning from crisis: How (not) to read the GM food controversy. Available online at: http://www.cid.harvard.edu.
54. Kalaitzandonakes, N. (1999). A farm-level perspective on agrobiotechnology: How much value and for whom? AgBioForum 2(2): 61-64.
55. Kelemen, R.D. (2002). Regulatory federalism: EU environmental regulation in comparative perspective. Journal of Public Policy 20(2): 133-167.
56. Kitschelt, H. (1986). Political opportunity structures and political protest: Anti-nuclear movements in four democracies. British Journal of Political Science 16: 57-85.
57. Krimsky, S. & Wrubel, R.P. (1996). Agricultural biotechnology and the environment: Science, policy and social issues. Urbana/Chicago, IL: University of Illinois Press.
58. Lehne, R. & Roozendaal, G.v. (1995). US government role in biotechnology R&D. Biotechnology and Development Monitor 24: 6-8.
59. Lemaux, P. (1998). Impact of public perception on regulatory policy for agricultural biotechnology. Paper presented at Nara International Symposium, Nara, Japan.
60. Lynch, D. & Vogel, D. (2000). Apples and oranges: Comparing the regulation of genetically modified food in Europe and the United States. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Political Science Association, 31 August-3 September, Washington, DC.
61. Marwell, G. & Oliver, P. (1993). The critical mass in collective action. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
62. Meins, E. (2002). Politics and public outrage: Explaining transatlantic and intra-European diversity of regulations on food irradiation and genetically modified food. (Doctoral thesis). Center for International Studies, University of Zurich.
63. Millstone, E. (2000). Analysing biotechnology's traumas. New Genetics and Society 19(2): 117-132.
64. Mitchell, R.B. & Bernauer, T. (1998). Empirical research on international environmental policy: Designing qualitative case studies, Journal of Environment and Development 7(1): 4-31.
65. Moore, E. (2000a). Food safety, labelling and the role of science: Regulating genetically-engineered food crops in Canada and the United States. Paper presented at ECPR Joint Sessions, 14-19 April, Copenhagen, Denmark.
66. Moore, E. (2000b). Science, internationalization and policy networks: Regulating genetically engineered food crops in Canada and the United States, 1973-1998. (Doctoral thesis). Department of Political Science, University of Toronto.
67. Murphy, D.D. (1995). Open economies and regulations: Convergence and competition among jurisdictions. (Doctoral thesis). Department of Political Science, Massachusetts Institute of Technology.
68. NCBE (1999). US regulations. Available online at: http://www.ncbe.reading.ac.uk/NCBE/GMFOOD.
69. NCGA (2000). Biotechnology and labeling. Available online at: http://www.ncga.com/04growers/issues/biotechlabeling.htm.
70. Neegaard, L. (1999). Bioengineered foods. Available online at: http://www-purefood.org/ge/fdapublic.cfm.
71. NFFC (1999). Farmers' declaration on genetic engineering in agriculture. Available online at: http://www.nffc.net/bio1.htm.
72. Olson, M. (1965). The logic of collective action. Cambridge, MA/London: Harvard University Press.
73. Patterson, L.A. (2000). Biotechnology policy, in H. Wallace & W. Wallace (eds.), Policy-making in the European Union. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
74. Pauker, P. (1999). Consumer benefits of biotechnology. Available online at: http://www.cid.harvard.edu.
75. RAFI (2000). Speed bump or blow-out for GM seeds? Available online at: http://www.rafi.org.
76. RAFI Communique (1998). Seed industry consolidation: Who owns whom? Available online at: http://www.rafl.org/communique.
77. Richards, J.E. (1999). Towards a positive theory of international institutions: Regulating international aviation markets. International Organization 53(1): 1-38.
78. Robert-Koch-Institut (1999). Gesetzliche Grundlagen, Richtlinien, internationale Regelungen. Available online at: http://www.rki.de.
79. Scharpf, F.W. (1996). Politische Optionen im vollendeten Binnenmarkt, in M. Jachtenfuchs & B. Kohler-Koch (eds.), Europäische Integration. Opladen: Leske+Budrich.
80. Scharpf, F.W. (1998). Globalization: The limitations of state capacity. Swiss Political Science Review 4(1): 92-98.
81. Stigler, G.J. (1971). The theory of economic regulation. Bell Journal of Economics and Management Science 2: 3-21.
82. USDA (2000). Prospective plantings report 2002. Washington, DC: National Agricultural Statistics Service. Available online at: www.usda.gov/nass.
83. US Grains Council (2000). Public policy positions. Available online at: http://www.grains.org/about/policies.shtm.
84. Vogel, D. (2001). The regulation of GMOs in Europe and the United States: A case study of contemporary European regulatory politics. New York/Washington, DC: Council on Foreign Relations.
85. Vogel, S.K. (1996). Freer markets, more rules. Ithaca, NY/London: Cornell University Press.
86. Vos, E. (2000). EU food safety regulation in the aftermath of the BSE crisis. Journal of Consumer Policy 23(3): 227-255.
87. Young, A.R. (1997). European consumer groups, in J. Greenwood & M. Aspinwall (eds.), Collective action in the European Union. London: Routledge.