Incommensurate risks and the regulator's dilemma: Considering culture in the governance of genetically modified organisms

New Genetics and Society

Volumn 27, Issue 3, 2008, Pages 201-216

  Satterfield, Terre ^a   Roberts, Mere ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA   (Canada)

^b Te Whare Wananga o Awanuiarangi   (New Zealand)

Author keywords

Culture; Genetically modified organisms; Governance; Maori; Risk

Indexed keywords

BIOTECHNOLOGY; BOARD OF TRUSTEES; CULTURAL ANTHROPOLOGY; CULTURAL FACTOR; DANGEROUS GOODS; DECISION MAKING; GENE TECHNOLOGY; LAW; MAORI; MEDICAL RESEARCH; METAPHYSICS; MULTIPLE SCLEROSIS; NEW ZEALAND; ORGANIZATION AND MANAGEMENT; POLICY; PRIORITY JOURNAL; QUALITY CONTROL; REVIEW; RISK ASSESSMENT; TRANSGENIC ORGANISM;

EID: 51349143721     PISSN: 14636778     EISSN: 14699915     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/14636770802326877     Document Type: Review

References (51)

1. Agrawal, A., 2005. Environmentality: technologies of government and the making of subjects. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.
2. Barlow, C., 1991. Tikanga Whakaaro: key concepts in Māori culture. Auckland, New Zealand: Oxford University Press.
3. Burchell, G., Gordon, C., and Miller, P., eds., 1991. The Foucault effect: studies in governmentality. University of Chicago Press.
4. Burley, N., 2007. Ira Taha Wairua project. Unpublished report, ERMA.
5. Carrier, J., 1998. Property and social relations in Melanesian anthropology. In: C. Hann, ed. Property relations: renewing the anthropological tradition. New York: Cambridge University Press, 85-103.
6. Cronin, K. and Jackson, L., 2004. Hands across the water: developing dialogue between stakeholders in the New Zealand biotechnology debate. A project for the Ministry of Research, Science, and Technology (MoRST) "Dialogue" Programme, School of Earth and Ocean Sciences, Victoria University of Wellington, September 2004.
7. Dean, M., 1999. Governmentality: power and rule in modern society. London: Sage.
8. Durie, M., 2004. Mana Tangata: culture, custom and transgenic research: the mysterious ethics of singing sheep and feet pointing backwards. In: Bioethics Council, Reflections on the use of human genes in other organisms: ethical, spiritual and cultural dimensions. Wellington: The Bioethics Council, 20-25.
9. ERMA, 2000. Notification of a decision of the Authority under the HSNO Act 1996. GMF98009, 21 July 2000.
10. ERMA, 2001. Notification of a decision of the Authority under the HSNO Act 1996. GMF 98009, 23 May 2001.
11. ERMA, 2004. Incorporating Māori perspectives in Part V decision making: Wellington, NZ. ER-RR-01-02, November 2004.
12. ERMA, 2007. Environmental Risk Management Authority Decision GMF 06001. 25 May 2007 (Brassica Approval).
13. ERMA, n.d. Annotated methodology for the consideration of applications for hazardous substances and new organisms under the HSNO Act 1996. Wellington: ERMA.
14. Finucane, M., et al., 2005. Tangata Whenua judgments of GMO acceptability/nonacceptability as determined by social, cultural, and technical variables. Decision Research, Publication No. 596 [online]. Available from: http://www.decisionresearch.org/publications/search/ [Accessed February 2008].
15. Hazardous Substances and New Organisms Act, 1996. No. 30, New Zealand Government, Wellington.
16. Henare, M., 1988. Ngā Tikanga me Ngā Ritenga o Te Ao Māori: standards and foundations of Māori society. In: The April Report: Report of the Royal Commission on Social Policy, Vol. III, Part I, 5-41.
17. Henare, M., 2001. Tapu, Mana, Mauri, Hau, Wairua: a Māori philosophy of vitalism and cosmos. In: J. Grim, ed. Indigenous traditions and ecology: the interbeing of cosmology and community. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 197-221.
18. Hindmarsh, R., 2005. Genetic engineering regulation in Australia: an "archaeology" of expertise and power. Science as Culture, 14 (4), 373-392.
19. Hutchings, J., 2004. Tradition and test tubes: Māori and GM. In: R. Hindmarsh and G. Lawrence, eds. Recoding nature: critical perspectives on genetic engineering. Melbourne: Scribe, 179-191.
20. Irwin, A., 2006. The politics of talk: coming to terms with the "new" scientific governance. Social Studies of Science, 36, 299-320.
21. Jackson, M., 2004. The mysterious ethics of singing sheep and feet pointing backwards. In: Bioethics Council, Reflections on the use of human genes in other organisms: ethical, spiritual and cultural dimensions. Wellington: The Bioethics Council, 71-75.
22. Jasanoff, S., 2003. Technologies of humility: citizen participation in governing science. Minerva, 41, 223-244.
23. Jasanoff, S., 2005. Designs on nature: science and democracy. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
24. Li, T.M., 2005. Beyond "the state" and failed schemes. American Anthropologist, 107 (3), 383-394.
25. Maori Law Review, 2000. High Court - Chief Judge power to correct errors of ERMA - human genes in cows. Maori Law Review, August, 5-9.
26. Marsden, M., 1975. God, man and universe: a Māori view. In: M. King, ed. Te Ao Hurihuri the world moves on. Wellington: Hicks Smith (reprinted 1992, Auckland: Octopus), 118-138.
27. Mauss, M., 1954. The gift in archaic societies. Translation by I. Cunnison; Introduction by E. Evans-Pritchard. London: Cohen & West.
28. Mead, A. and Ratuva, S., eds., 2007. Pacific genes and life patents: Pacific indigenous experiences & analysis of the commodification of ownership of life. Wellington: Call of the Earth Llamado de la Tierra and Yokohama, Japan: United Nations University Institute of Advanced Studies.
29. Mead, H.M., 2003. Tikanga Māori: living by Māori values. Wellington: Huia Publications.
30. Ministry for the Environment, 2003. Law changes for new and genetically modified organisms [online]. Available from: http://www.mfe.govt.nz/issues/organisms/law-changes/ [Accessed June 2008].
31. Ministry for the Environment and the Treasury, 2003. Economic risks and opportunities from the release of genetically modified organisms in New Zealand. Wellington: Ministry for the Environment.
32. Mitchell, T., 2000. The stage of modernity. In: T. Mitchell, ed. Questions of modernity. Minneapolis: University of Minneapolis Press, 1-34.
33. Mitchell, T., 2002. The rule of experts: Egypt, techno-politics, and modernity. Berkeley, CA: UC Press.
34. Morgan, T.K.K.B., 2006. Decision-support tools and the indigenous paradigm. Proceedings of the Institution of Civil Engineers: Engineering Sustainability, 159 (4), 169-177.
35. Nadasy, P., 1999. The politics of TEK: power and the integration of knowledge. Arctic Anthropology, 36 (1-2), 1-18.
36. Nahkies, G., Loutit, M., and Rogne, S., 2003. A review of the capability of the Environmental Risk Management Authority (ERMA) relating to the risk management of new organisms. Report for the Ministry for the Environment, March 2003.
37. New Zealand, 1996. The Hazardous Substances and New Organisms (HSNO) Act 1996. Wellington: New Zealand Government.
38. RCGM, 2001. Report of the Royal Commission on Genetic Modification. Wellington: Royal Commission on Genetic Modification.
39. Roberts, M., 2000. Genetically modified organisms and Maori: a critique of the ERMA process for assessing cultural effects under the HSNO Act 1996. Report prepared for the Winston Churchill Memorial Trust, Wellington.
40. Roberts, M., et al., 2004. Whakapapa as a Māori mental construct: some implications for the debate over genetic modification of organisms. The Contemporary Pacific, 16 (1), 1-28.
41. Rogers-Hayden, T., 2005. Asilomar's legacy in Aotearoa New Zealand. Science as Culture, 14 (4), 393-410.
42. Rogers-Hayden, T. and Hindmarsh, R., 2002. Modernity contextualises New Zealand's Royal Commission on Genetic Modification: a discourse analysis. Journal of New Zealand Studies, NS1 (1), 41-61.
43. Rumsey, A., 2000. Person, agency, and the "I" of discourse in the Pacific and beyond. Journal of the Royal Anthropological Institute, 6 (1), 101-115.
44. Salmond, A., 1997. Between worlds: early exchanges between Māori and Europeans 1773-1815. Auckland: Viking.
45. Salmond, A., 2000. Māori and modernity: Ruatara's dying. In: A. Cohen, ed. Signifying identities. London: Routledge, 37-58.
46. Satterfield, T., et al., 2005. Culture, risk, and the prospect of genetically modified organisms as viewed by Tāngata Whenua. Research Report No.1. Faculty of Science, Te Whare Wananga o Awanui rangi, Whakatane, New Zealand. Decision Research Report [online] Available from: http://www.decisionresearch.org/publications/search/ [Accessed February 2008].
47. Scott, A. and Tipene-Matua, B., 2004. Cultural conflict and new biotechnologies: what is at risk? In: K. Dew and R. Fitzgerald, eds. Challenging science: issues for New Zealand Society in the 21st century. Palmerston North: Dunmore Press.
48. Scott, J., 1998. Seeing like a state: how certain schemes to improve the human condition have failed. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
49. Strathern, M., 1988. The gender of the gift: problems with women and problems with society in Melanesia. Berkeley: University of California Press.
50. Wilcox, P., et al., 2007. A values-based framework for cross-cultural dialogue between scientists and Māori (submitted to the Journal of the Royal Society of New Zealand).
51. Williams, H.W., 1971. A dictionary of the Māori language. 7th ed. Wellington: Legislation Direct.