Evaluating oversight systems for emerging technologies: A case study of genetically engineered organisms

Journal of Law, Medicine and Ethics

Volumn 37, Issue 4, 2009, Pages 546-586

  Kuzma, Jennifer ^a   Najmaie, Pouya ^a   Larson, Joel ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

AGRICULTURE; BIOMEDICAL TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENT; BIOTECHNOLOGY; CONFERENCE PAPER; CONSENSUS; DECISION SUPPORT SYSTEM; ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION; GENETIC ENGINEERING; GENETICALLY MODIFIED FOOD; GOVERNMENT REGULATION; HEALTH SERVICES RESEARCH; HISTORY; HUMAN; INTERDISCIPLINARY COMMUNICATION; LEGAL ASPECT; LITERATURE; MANAGEMENT; NANOTECHNOLOGY; SAFETY; SYSTEM ANALYSIS; TRANSGENIC ORGANISM; UNITED STATES;

AGRICULTURE; BIOTECHNOLOGY; CONSENSUS; CONSERVATION OF NATURAL RESOURCES; CONSUMER PRODUCT SAFETY; DECISION SUPPORT TECHNIQUES; FOOD, GENETICALLY MODIFIED; GENETIC ENGINEERING; GOVERNMENT REGULATION; HISTORY, 20TH CENTURY; HUMANS; INTERDISCIPLINARY COMMUNICATION; NANOTECHNOLOGY; ORGANISMS, GENETICALLY MODIFIED; ORGANIZATIONAL CASE STUDIES; POLICY MAKING; REVIEW LITERATURE AS TOPIC; SYSTEMS ANALYSIS; TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENT, BIOMEDICAL; UNITED STATES;

EID: 76149114606     PISSN: 10731105     EISSN: 1748720X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1748-720X.2009.00431.x     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (161)

1. J. B. Wiener, "The Regulation of Technology, and the Technology of Regulation Technology in Society 26, nos. 2-3 (2004 483 500 C. Davies, EPA and Nanotechnology: Oversight for the 21st Century, Project on Emerging Nanotechnologies, Washington, D.C., 2007.
2. I. Rabino, "How European and U.S. Genetic Engineering Scientists View the Impact of Public Attention on Their Field: A Comparison Science, Technology, and Human Values 19, no. 1 (1994 23 46)
3. B. Zechendorf, "What the Public Thinks About Biotechnology: A Survey of Opinion Polls," Bio/Technology 12, no. 9 (1994): 870-875
4. M. Siegrist, C. Keller, H. Kastenholz, S. Frey, and A. Wiek, "Laypeople's and Expert's Perceptions of Nanotechnology Hazards," Risk Analysis 27, no.1 (2007): 59-69
5. M. D. Cobb and J. Macoubrie, "Public Perceptions about Nanotechnology: Risks, Benefits and Trust," Journal of Nanoparticle Research 6, no. 4 (2004): 395-405
6. J. Macoubrie, "Nanotechnology: Public Concerns, Reasoning, and Trust in Government," Public Understanding of Science 15, no. 2 (2006): 221-241.
7. J. Abraham, "Regulatory Science as Culture: Contested Two-Dimensional Values at the US FDA Science as Culture 11, no. 3 (2002 309 336.
8. S. Jasanoff, The Fifth Branch: Science Advisors as Policymakers (Cambridge : Harvard University Press, 1990).
9. National Nanotechnology Initiative, "What Is Nanotechnology?" available at http://www.nano.gov/html/facts/whatIsNano.html last visited August 27, 2009).
10. Project on Emerging Technologies, "A Nanotechnology Consumer Products Inventory available at http://www.nanotech-project.org/44/consumer- nanotechnology last visited August 4, 2008).
11. J. Kuzma, J. Romanchek, and A. Kokotovich, "Upstream Oversight Assessment for Agrifood Nanotechnology Risk Analysis 28, no. 4 (2008 1081 1098.
12. C. James, Global Status of Commercialized Biotech/GM Crops: 2007, International Service for the Acquisition Agri-biotech Applications (ISAAA) Brief no. 37 (Ithaca, NY : ISAAA, 2007).
13. Economic Research Service, United States Department of Agriculture, "Agricultural Biotechnology: Adoption of Biotechnology and its Production Impacts available at http://www.ers.usda.gov/Briefing/Biotechnology/chapter1.htm last visited September 24, 2008.
14. P. Berg, D. Baltimore, and S. Brenner, "Asilomar Conference on Recombinant DNA Molecules Science 185, no. 4148 (1975 303).
15. National Institutes of Health, "Guidelines for Research Involving Recombinant DNA Molecules Federal Register 43, no. 247 (1978 60108 60131.
16. Office of Science and Technology Policy, "Coordinated Framework for the Regulation of Biotechnology Federal Register 51, no. 123 (1986 23302 23350.
17. U.S. Congress, Environmental Implications of Genetic Engineering, 98th Congress, 1st Session, Hearing before the Subcommittee on Investigations and Oversight and the Subcommittee on Science, Research and Technology, Committee on Science and Technology (Washington D.C. : Government Printing Office, 1983).
18. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Introduction of Organisms and Products Altered or Produced through Genetic Engineering Which Are Plant Pests or Which There Is a Reason to Believe Are Plant Pests, 7 C.F.R. §340 (1997 U.S. Department of Agriculture, "Genetically Engineered Organisms and Products: Notification Procedures for the Introduction of Certain Regulated Articles and Petition for Nonregulated Status," Federal Register 58, no. 60 (1993): 17044-17059.
19. National Research Council, Genetically Modified Pest-Protected Plants: Science and Regulation (Washington, D.C. : National Academy Press, 2000 Environmental Protection Agency, "Regulations under the Federal Fungicide, Insecticide, and Rodenticide Act for Plant-Incorporated Protectants," Federal Register 66, no. 139 (2001): 37855-37869.
20. Environmental Protection Agency, Microbial Products of Biotechnology: Final Regulations under the Toxic Substances Control Act, 40 C.F.R. §725 (1997).
21. Food and Drug Administration, "Statement of Policy: Foods Derived from New Plant Varieties Federal Register 57, no. 104 (1992 22984 23005.
22. Food and Drug Administration, Center for Veterinary Medicine, "Information for Consumers: Questions and Answers about Transgenic Fish available at http://www.fda.gov/cvm/transgen.htm last visited September 24, 2008).
23. National Academy of Sciences, Introduction of Recombinant DNA-Engineered Organisms into the Environment (Washington, D.C : National Academy Press, 1987).
24. A. McHugen and S. Smyth, "US Regulatory System for Genetically Modified [Genetically Modified Organisms (GMO), rDNA or Transgenic] Crop Cultivars Plant Biotechnology Journal 6 (2008 2 12.
25. Id., at 20.
26. See Jasanoff, supra note 4.
27. Pew Initiative on Food and Biotechnology, The Gene Is Out of the Bottle: So Where to Next Prepared by Zogby International for the Pew Initiative on Food and Biotechnology and the Gene Media Forum, Washington, D.C., 2001, available at http://www.pewtrusts.org/uploadedFiles/wwwpewtrustsorg/Research/vf-biotech- gene-bottle.pdf last visited August 28, 2009).
28. Pew Initiative on Food and Biotechnology, U.S. vs. EU: An Examination of the Trade Issues Surrounding Genetically Modified Food, Washington, D.C., 2005, available at http://www.pewtrusts.org/uploadedFiles/wwwpewtrustsorg/Reports/ Food-and-Biotechnology/Biotech-USEU1205.pdf last visited August 28, 2009).
29. See U.S. Department of Agriculture, supra note 14 National Research Council, Environmental Effects of Transgenic Plants (Washington, D.C. : National Academies Press, 2002).
30. P. Thompson, Food Biotechnology in Ethical Perspective, 2nd ed. (Dordrecht, Netherlands : Springer, 2007).
31. J. Kuzma, "Nanotechnology Oversight: Just Do It Environmental Law Reporter 36 (2006 10913 10923).
32. See Thompson, supra note 26; J. Kuzma and J. C. Besley, "Ethics of Risk Analysis and Regulatory Review: From Bio- to Nanotechnology," Nanoethics 2, no 2 (2008): 149-162.
33. Environmental Protection Agency, Guidelines for Performing Regulatory Impact Analysis, EPA 230-01-84-003 (Washington, D.C. : U.S. Government Printing Office, 1983 U.S. Office of Technology Assessment, Environmental Policy Tools (Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1995); see Davies, supra note 1.
34. Id. (Environmental Protection Agency); Office of the Press Secretary, The White House, Regulatory Planning and Review: Executive Order 2866, September 30, 1993, available at http://govinfo.library.unt.edu/npr/library/direct/orders/ 2646.html last visited August 28, 2009), 2007 amendments available at http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2007/01/20070118.html last visited September 24, 2008).
35. See National Research Council, supra note 15; National Research Council, supra note 25; Pew Initiative on Food and Biotechnology, Issues in the Regulation of Genetically Engineered Plants and Animals, available at http://www.pewtrusts.org/uploadedFiles/wwwpewtrustsorg/Reports/ Food-and-biotechnology/food-biotech-regulation-0404.pdf last visited August 28, 2009).
36. S. Jasanoff, Designs on Nature (Princeton : Princeton University Press, 2005).
37. See Thompson, supra note 26; K. Shrader-Frechete, "Nano-toxicology and Ethical Considerations for Informed Consent," Nanoethics 1, no. 1 (2007): 47-56.
38. C. V. Patton and D. S. Sawicki, Basic Methods of Policy Analysis and Planning, 2nd ed. (Upper Saddle River, NJ : Prentice Hall, 1993).
39. See Environmental Protection Agency, supra note 29; Office of the Press Secretary, supra note 30.
40. B. Bozeman and D. Sarewitz, "Public Values and Public Failure in U.S. Science Policy Science and Public Policy 32, no. 2 (2005 119 136.
41. Id., at 136.
42. P. Singer, F. Salamanca-Buentello, and A. Daar, "Harnessing Nanotechnology to Improve Global Equity Issues in Science and Technology (Summer 2005 57 64.
43. L. Walters, "Human Embryonic Stem Cell Research: An Intercultural Perspective Kennedy Institute of Ethics Journal 14, no. 1 (2004 3 38.
44. See Jasanoff, supra note 4; J. Wilsdon and R. Willis, See-Through Science (London: Demos, 2004), available at http://www.demos.co.uk/files/ Seethroughsciencefinal.pdf last visited August 28, 2009)
45. P. Macnaghten, M. B. Kearnes, and B. Wynne, "Nanotechnology, Governance, and Public Deliberation: What Role for the Social Sciences?" Science Communication 27, no. 2 (2005): 268-291.
46. B. L. Berg, Qualitative Research Methods for the Social Sciences, 6th ed. (Boston : Pearson Education, Inc., 2007 at 6.
47. Id., at 7.
48. J. Kuzma, J. Paradise, G. Ramachandran, J. A. Kim, A. Kokotovich, and S. M. Wolf, "An Integrated Approach to Oversight Assessment for Emerging Technologies Risk Analysis 28, no. 5 (2008 1197 1220.
49. V. Belton and T. J. Stewart, Multiple Criteria Decision Analysis: An Integrated Approach (Boston : Kulwer Academic Publishers, 2002).
50. I. Linkov et al., "Multi-criteria Decision Analysis: a Comprehensive Decision Approach for Management of Contaminated Sediments Risk Analysis 26, no. 1 (2006 61 78.
51. G. Morgan and M. Henrion, Uncertainty: A Guide to Dealing with Uncertainty in Quantitative Risk and Policy Analysis (Cambridge : Cambridge University Press, 1990 at 102-171.
52. See Kuzma et al., supra note 43.
53. J. Paradise, S. M. Wolf, G. Ramachandran, E. Kokkoli, R. Hall, and J. Kuzma, "Developing Oversight Frameworks for Nano-biotechnology Minnesota Journal of Law, Science, and Technology 9, no. 1 (2008 399 416.
54. See Kuzma et al., supra note 43.
55. C. Rabin, Fuzzy Set Social Science (Chicago : University of Chicago Press, 2000 at 57.
56. J. Forrester, "System Dynamics and the Lessons of 35 Years in K. B. D. Greene, ed., Systems-Based Approach to Policymaking (Boston : Kluwer Academic Publishers, 1993).
57. J. D. Sterman, "Learning In and About Complex Systems System Dynamics Review 10, nos. 2-3 (1994 291 330.
58. See Macoubrie, supra note 2.
59. T. Beauchamp and L. Walters, "Ethical Theory and Bioethics in T. Beauchamp and L. Walters, eds., Contemporary Issues in Bioethics, 5th ed. (Belmont, CA : Wadsworth Publishing Company, 1999 at 1-32.
60. See Morgan and Henrion, supra note 46.
61. See Berg, supra note 41, at 44.
62. S. K. Wolff, N. C. Hawkins, S. M. Kennedy, and J. D. Graham, "Selecting Experimental Data for Use in Qualitative Risk Assessment: An Expert Judgment Approach Toxicology & Industrial Health 6 (1990 275 291.
63. J. E. Siegel, J. D. Graham, and M. A. Stoto, "Allocating Resources Among AIDS Research Strategies Policy Sciences 23, no. 1 (1990 1 23)
64. J. S. Evans, G. M. Gray, R. L. Sielken, A. E. Smith, C. Valdez-Flores, and J. D. Graham, "Use of Probabilistic Expert Judgment in Distributional Analysis of Carcinogenic Potency," Regulatory Toxicology and Pharmacology 20, no. 1 (1994): 15-36.
65. N. C. Hawkins and J. S. Evans, "Subjective Estimation of Toluene Exposures: A Calibration Study of Industrial Hygienists Applied Industrial Hygiene Journal 4 (1989 61 68.
66. See Berg, supra note 41, at 95.
67. Id., at 313.
68. See Kuzma et al., supra note 43.
69. See Id.; Morgan and Henrion, supra note 46; Linkov, supra note 45.
70. See National Research Council, supra note 15.
71. G. Jaffe, "Regulating Transgenic Crops: A Comparative Analysis of Different Regulatory Processes Transgenic Research 13, no. 1 (2004 5 19 National Research Council, Safety of Genetically Engineered Foods (Washington, D.C.: National Academies Press, 2004).
72. See National Research Council, supra note 15.
73. See National Research Council, supra note 25.
74. See Id.; Jaffe, supra note 65.
75. See National Research Council, supra note 15; National Research Council, supra note 25.
76. See National Research Council, supra note 15; Pew Initiative on Food and Biotechnology, Agricultural Biotechnology: Information Disclosure: Accommodating Conflicting Interests within Public Access Norms, Washington, D.C., 2006, available at http://www.pewtrusts.org/uploadedFiles/wwwpewtrustsorg/Summaries--- reports-and-pubs/PIFB-AgBiotech-Info-Disclosure-Workshop-Report.pdf last visited August 31, 2009).
77. See Jaffe, supra note 65; Kuzma and Besley, supra note 28.
78. Pew Initiative on Food and Biotechnology, Public Sentiment about Genetically Modified Food, Washington, D.C., 2006, available at http://www.pewtrusts.org/uploadedFiles/wwwpewtrustsorg/Public-opinion/ Food-and-Biotechnology/2006summary.pdf last visited August 31, 2009).
79. See Shrader-Frechete, supra note 33.
80. See National Research Council, supra note 25; Jaffe, supra note 65.
81. Pew Initiative on Food and Biotechnology, Post-Market Oversight of Biotech Foods: Is the System Prepared Washington, D.C., 2003, available at http://www.pewtrusts.org/uploaded-Files/wwwpewtrustsorg/Reports/ Food-and-Biotechnology/hhs-biotech-corn-0403.pdf last visited August 31, 2009).
82. See National Research Council, supra note 15; Shrader-Frechete, supra note 33.
83. See Beauchamp and Walters, supra note 54; Kuzma and Besley, supra note 28.
84. See Davies, supra note 1.
85. See Kuzma et al., supra note 43.
86. See Davies, supra note 1.
87. Pew Initiative on Food and Biotechnology, The Stakeholder Forum on Agricultural Biotechnology: an Overview of the Process, Washington, D.C., 2003, available at http://www.pewtrusts.org/uploadedFiles/wwwpewtrustsorg/Reports/ Food-and-Biotechnology/PIFB-StakeholderForum-Process.pdf last visited August 31, 2009).
88. See Davies, supra note 1.
89. Section of Environment, Energy, and Resources, American Bar Association, "Section Nanotechnology Project available at http://www.abanet.org/environ/ nanotech/ last visited August 31, 2009).
90. J. F. Fernandez-Cornejo and M. Caswell, The First Decade of Genetically Engineered Crops in the United States, Economic Research Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture, Economic Information Bulletin, no. 11 (April 2006 available at http://www.ers.usda.gov/publications/eib11/eib11.pdf last visited August 31, 2009).
91. See James, supra note 8; J. Huang, S. Rozelle, C. Pray, and Q. Wang, "Plant Biotechnology in China," Science 295, no. 5555 (2002): 674-676.
92. National Research Council, Ecological Monitoring of Genetically Engineered Crops (Washington, D.C. : National Academy Press, 2001
93. M. Marvier, Y. Carrière, N. Ellstrand, P. Gepts, P. Kareiva, E. Rosi-Marshall, B. E. Tabashnik, and L. L. Wolfenbarger, "Harvesting Data from Genetically Engineered Crops," Science 320, no. 5875 (2008): 452-453.
94. N. Kalaitzandonakes, "Compliance Costs for Regulatory Approval of Biotech Crops in R. Just, J. Alston, and D. Zilberman, eds., Regulating Agricultural Biotechnology: Economics and Policy, 1st. ed., vol. 1 (New York : Springer, 2006 at 37-57.
95. See Id.
96. See National Research Council, supra note 15.
97. G. Jaffe, Withering on the Vine: Will Agricultural Biotech's Promise Bear Fruit Center for Science in the Public Interest, Washington, D.C., 2005.
98. Food and Drug Administration, "Guidance for Industry: Regulation of Genetically Engineered Animals Containing Heritable rDNA Constructs Federal Register 73, no. 183 (2008 54407 54408.
99. A. Pollack, "Without Rules, Biotech Food Lacks Investors New York Times, July 30, 2007, available at http://www.nytimes.com/2007/07/30/washington/ 30animal.html?ei=5090&en=e363a290fc0b105e&ex=1343448000&adxnnl= 1&partner=rssuserland&emc=rss&adxnnlx=1185773484-OtAmD8CXl20VvR/ last visited August 31, 2009).
100. M. E. Porter, "America's Green Strategy Scientific American 264, no. 4 (1991 168 168.
101. See Jaffe, supra note 90.
102. See Kalaitzandonakes, supra note 87.
103. K. Bradford, N. Deynze, N. Gutterson, W. Parrot, and S. Strauss, "Regulating Transgenic Crops Sensibly: Lessons from Plant Breeding, Biotechnology, and Genomics Nature Biotechnology 23, no. 4 (2005 439 444 see Jaffe, supra note 90)
104. D. McElroy, "Sustaining Agbiotechnology through Lean Times," Nature Biotechnology 21, no. 9 (2003): 996-1002
105. H. Miller and G. Conko, "Agricultural Biotechnology: Overregulated and Underappreciated," Issues in Science and Technology 21, no 2 (2005): 76-80.
106. See National Research Council, supra note 15.
107. See Id.
108. See McElroy, supra note 96.
109. D. Schimmelpfennig, C. E. Pray, and M. F. Brennen, "The Impact of Seed Industry Concentration on Innovation: A Study of U.S. Biotech Market Leaders Agricultural Economics 30, no. 2 (2004 157 167)
110. See K. Bradford et al., supra note 96; Jaffe, supra note 90; McElroy, supra note 96; Miller and Conko, supra note 96
111. K. Redenbaugh and A. McHughen, "Regulatory Challenges Reduce Opportunities for Horticultural Biotechnology," California Agriculture 58, no. 2 (2004): 106-111
112. D. T. Kingsbury, "A View of North American Regulations: Their Aims and Effects on the Biotechnology Industry," Journal of Chemical Technology and Biotechnology 64, no. 3 (1995): 299-300.
113. See Kalaitzandonakes, supra note 87.
114. See Jaffe, supra note 90.
115. See Pew Initiative on Food and Biotechnology, supra note 23.
116. Pew Initiative on Food and Biotechnology, Public Sentiment about Genetically Modified Food, prepared by Mellman Group and Public Opinion Strategies for the Pew Initiative on Food and Biotechnology, Washington, D.C., 2001, available at http://www.pewtrusts.org/uploadedFiles/wwwpewtrustsorg/ Public-Opinion/Food-and-Biotechnology/survey3-01.pdf last visited August 31, 2009).
117. Pew Initiative on Food and Biotechnology, U.S. Consumer Opinion Divided: An Overview of 2004 Findings, Washington, D.C., 2004, available at http://www.pewtrusts.org/uploadedFiles/wwwpewtrustsorg/Public-Opinion/ Food-and-Biotechnology/2004overview.pdf last visited August 31, 2009).
118. Pew Initiative on Food and Biotechnology, Public Sentiment about Genetically Modified Food, Washington, D.C., 2005, available at http://www.pewtrusts.org/uploadedFiles/wwwpewtrustsorg/Public-Opinion/ Food-and-Biotechnology/2005summary.pdf last visited August 31, 2009).
119. See Pew Initiative on Food and Biotechnology, supra note 23.
120. W. K. Hallman et al., Public Perceptions of Genetically Modified Foods: A National Study of American Knowledge and Opinion, Food Policy Institute Report, RR-1003-004, Food Policy Institute, New Brunswick, NJ, 2003, available at http://www.foodpolicyinstitute.org/docs/reports/National-Study2003.pdf last visited May 28, 2009).
121. S. H. Priest, "U.S. Public Opinion Divided over Biotechnology?" Nature Biotechnology 18, no. 9 (2000 939 942.
122. See Id., at 110. Harris Interactive, "Genetically Modified Foods and Crops: Public Still Divided on Benefits and Risks Harris Poll, 49, July 2004, available at http://www.harris-interactive.com/harris-poll/index.asp?PID=478 last visited August 31, 2009).
123. S. H. Priest, "Misplaced Faith: Communication Variables as Predictors of Encouragement for Biotechnology Development Science Communication 23, no. 2 (2001 97 100).
124. S. K. Balasubramanian and W. Moon, "Public Perceptions and Willingness-to-pay a Premium for Non-GM Foods in the U.S. and U.K. Journal of Agrobiotechnology Management and Economics 4, nos. 3-4 (2001 221 331)
125. B. Fischoff and I. Fischoff, "Public's Opinion About Biotechnology," Journal of Agrobiotechnology Management and Economics 4, nos. 3-4 (2001): 155-162
126. J. T. Lang and W. K. Hallman, "Who Does the Public Trust? The Case of Genetically Modified Food in the United States," Risk Analysis 25, no. 5 (2005): 1241-1251
127. Priest, supra note 110
128. L. Frewer, "Societal Issues and Public Attitudes towards Genetically Modified Foods," Trends in Food Science and Technology 14, nos. 5-8 (2003): 319-332
129. F. Hossain, B. Onyango, B. J. Schilling, and W. K. Hallman, "Public Perceptions of Biotechnology and Acceptance of Genetically Modified Food," Journal of Food Distribution Research 34, no. 3 (2003): 36-50.
130. See Lang and Hallman, supra note 114.
131. See Siegrist et al., supra note 2.
132. See Lang and Hallman, supra note 114.
133. See Priest, supra note 110.
134. See Lang and Hallman, supra note 114.
135. See Pew Initiative on Food and Biotechnology, supra note 23.
136. See Pew Initiative on Food and Biotechnology, supra note 72; National Research Council, supra note 25.
137. See Jaffe, supra note 90.
138. S. H. Priest, supra note 110; K. Blaine, S. Kamaldeen, and D. Powell, "Public Perceptions of Biotechnology," Journal of Food Science 67, no. 9 (2002): 3200-3208.
139. New Thoughts for Food: Consumer Perceptions and Attitudes towards Food: Final Report (Winnipeg, Manitoba : Ipsos-Reid, 2001 available at http://www.agbioforum.org/v4n34/v4n34a05-powell.htm last visited August 31, 2009).
140. Food and Drug Administration, CVM letter to University of Illinois (October 3, 2003 available at http://www.fda.gov/cvm/FOI/UILetter.htm last visited May 28, 2009).
141. See Pew Initiative on Food and Biotechnology, supra note 23.
142. P. Slovic, "Perception of Risk Science 236, no. 4788 (1987 280 285.
143. See Kuzma and Besley, supra note 28.
144. See Berg, supra note 41, at 313.
145. See Jaffe, supra note 65.
146. See Kuzma and Besley, supra note 28.
147. See National Research Council, supra note 15.
148. See Siegrist et al., supra note 2.
149. Office of Science and Technology Policy, "Food and Agricultural Biotechnology Initiatives: Strengthening Science-Based Regulation May 3, 2000, available at http://clinton4.nara.gov/WH/EOP/OSTP/html/0058.html last visited August 31, 2009).
150. See National Research Council, supra note 15.
151. See Kuzma et al., supra note 43.
152. R. T. Clemen and T. Reilly, Making Hard Decisions with Decision Tools Suite Update, 1st ed. (Pacific Grove, CA : Duxbury Resource Center, 2001 at 315.
153. Food and Drug Administration, "FDA Announces Proposal and Draft Guidance for Food Developed through Biotechnology January 17, 2001, available at http://www.cfsan.fda.gov/∼lrd/hhbioen3.html last visited September 30, 2008).
154. See Macoubrie, supra note 2.
155. See Kuzma, supra note 27; Davies, supra note 1.
156. J. Kuzma, J. Romanchek, and A. Kokotovich, "Upstream Oversight Assessment for Agrifood Nanotechnology Risk Analysis 28, no. 4 (2008 1081 1098.
157. See Wilsdon and Willis, supra note 40.
158. Office of Science and Technology Policy, "Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ) and OSTP Assessment: Case Studies of Environmental Regulations for Biotechnology Washington D.C., 2001, available at http://ostp.gov/html/012201. html last visited May 28, 2009).
159. Food and Drug Administration, "Nanotechnology: A Report of the U.S. Food and Drug Administration Nanotechnology Task Force July 25, 2007, available at http://www.fda.gov/nanotechnology/taskforce/report2007.html last visited September 30, 2007).
160. Environmental Protection Agency, "Nanoscale Materials Stewardship Program Federal Register 73, no. 18 (2008 4861 4866.
161. See Davies, supra note 1.