Ethics of Science for Policy in the Environmental Governance of Biotechnology: MON810 Maize in Europe

Ethics, Policy and Environment

Volumn 15, Issue 3, 2012, Pages 321-340

  Wickson, Fern ^a   Wynne, Brian ^b  

^a Center for Biosafety   (Norway)

^b LANCASTER UNIVERSITY   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

AGRICULTURAL POLICY; BIOTECHNOLOGY; CROP PRODUCTION; GENETICALLY MODIFIED ORGANISM; GOVERNANCE APPROACH; MAIZE; POLICY REFORM;

EUROPE;

ZEA MAYS;

EID: 84871397299     PISSN: 21550085     EISSN: 21550093     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/21550085.2012.730245     Document Type: Article

References (56)

1. Albo, AG, Mila, S, Digilio, G, Motto, M, Aime, S and Corpillo, D. 2007. Proteomic analysis of a genetically modified maize flour carrying Cry1Ab gene and comparison to the corresponding wild-type. Maydica, 53: 443-455.
2. Andow, DA and Hilbeck, A. 2004. Science-based risk assessment for nontarget effects of transgenic crops. BioScience, 54: 637-649.
3. Barnes, B. & Edge, D. (Eds). (1982). Science in context: Readings in the sociology of science (Milton Keynes: Open University Press)
4. Barros, E, Lezar, S, Anttonen, MJ, van Dijk, JP, Röhlig, RM, Kok, EJ and Engel, KH. 2010. Comparison of two GM maize varieties with a near-isogenic non-GM variety using transcriptomics, proteomics and metabolomics. Plant Biotechnology Journal, 8: 436-451.
5. Batista, R and Oliveira, M. 2010. Plant natural variability may affect safety assessment data. Regulatory Toxicology and Pharmacology, 58: 8-12.
6. Bossdorf, O, Richards, C and Pigliucci, M. 2008. Epigenetics for ecologists. Ecology Letters, 11: 106-115.
7. Bøhn, T, Primicerio, R, Hessen, DO and Traavik, T. 2008. Reduced fitness of Daphnia magna fed a Bt-transgenic maize variety. Archives of Environmental Contamination Toxicology, 55: 584-592.
8. Diels, J, Cunha, M, Manaia, C, Sabugosa-Madeira, B and Silva, M. 2011. Association of financial or professional conflict of interest to research outcomes on health risks or nutritional assessment studies of genetically modified products. Food Policy, 36: 197-203.
9. Doubleday, R and Wynne, B. 2011. "Despotism and democracy in UK science: Experiments in reframing citizenship". In Reframing rights: Bioconstitutionalism in the genetic age, Edited by: Jasanoff, S. 239-261. Cambridge: MIT Press.
10. EC (2010). Proposal amending directive 2001/18/EC as regards the possibility for the members states to restrict or prohibit the cultivation of GMOs in their territory COM(2010) 375. Retrieved fromhttp://ec.europa.eu/food/food/biotechnology/docs/proposal_en.pdf
11. EFSA (2009). Applications (EFSA-GMO-RX-MON810) for the renewal of authorisation for the continued marketing of (1) existing food and food ingredients produced from genetically modified insect resistant maize MON810; (2) feed consisting of and/or containing maize MON810, including the use of seed for cultivation; and of (3) food and feed additives, and feed materials produced from maize MON810, all under Regulation (EC) No 1829/2003 from Monsanto. The EFSA Journal, 1149, 1-85
12. Elliott, K and McKaughan, DJ. 2009. How values in scientific discovery and pursuit alter theory appraisal. Philosophy of Science, 76: 598-611.
13. ENSSER (2011). ENSSER comments on the EFSA guidance on the environmental risk assessment of genetically modified plants. On guidance chapters 2.1 & 2.2. Berlin: European Network of Scientists for Social and Environmental Responsibility.http://www.ensser.org.fileadmin/files/ENSSER_Comments_ERA_guidance.pdf
14. European Parliament (2011). European Parliament legislative resolution on the proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the council amending directive 2001/18/EC as regards the possibility for the member states to restrict or prohibit the cultivation of GMOs in their territory (COM(2010)0375-C7-0178/2010-2010/0208(COD)). Retrieved from http://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/seance_pleniere/textes_adoptes/provisoire/2011/07-05/0314/P7_TA-PROV(2011)0314_EN.pdf
15. Freese, W and Schubert, D. 2004. Safety testing and regulation of genetically engineered food. Biotechnology and Genetic Engineering Reviews, 21: 299-225.
16. Gibbs, WW. 2003. The unseen genome: Gems among the junk. Scientific American, 289: 46-53.
17. GMO-free Europe (2010). GE cultivation bans in Europe. Retrieved fromhttp://www.gmo-free-regions.org/gmo-free-regions/bans.html
18. Halsberger, AG. 2006. Need for an 'integrated safety assessment' of GMOs, linking food safety and environmental considerations. Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry, 54: 3173-3180.
19. Hesse, M. 1974. The structure of scientific inference, Berkeley: University of California Press.
20. Hilbeck, A, Meier, M, Römbke, J, Jänsch, S, Teichmann, H and Tappeser, B. 2011. Environmental risk assessment of genetically modified plants-concepts and controversies. Environmental Sciences Europe, 23(13): 1-12.
21. Hilbeck, A., Meier, M., & Trtikova, M. (2012). Underlying reasons of the controversy over adverse effects of Bt toxins on lady beetle and lacewing larvae. Environmental Sciences Europe, 24(9). Retrieved fromhttp://www.enveurope.com/content/pdf/2190-4715-24-9.pdf
22. Jasanoff, S. 1990. The fifth branch: Scientific advisers as policy makers, Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
23. Kuzma, J and Besley, JC. 2008. Ethics of risk analysis and regulatory review: From bio-to nanotechnology. Nanoethics, 2: 149-162.
24. Lacey, H. 2005. Values and objectivity in science: The current controversy about GM crops, Boulder, CO: Lexington Books.
25. Latour, B. 1987. Science in action: How to follow scientists and engineers through society, Milton Keynes: Open University Press.
26. Levidow, L and Boschert, K. 2008. Coexistence or contradiction? GM crops versus alternative agricultures in Europe. Geoforum, 39: 174-190.
27. Levidow, L and Carr, S. 1997. How biotechnology regulation sets a risk/ethics boundary. Agriculture and Human Values, 14: 29-43.
28. Malatesta, M, Boraldi, F, Annovi, G, Baldelli, B, Battistelli, S, Biggiogera, M and Quaglino, D. 2008. A long-term study on female mice fed on a genetically modified soybean: Effects on liver ageing. Histochemistry and Cell Biology, 130: 967-977.
29. Mattick, JS. 2003. Challenging the dogma: The hidden layer of non-protein-coding RNAs in complex organisms. BioEssays, 25: 930-939.
30. Mayer, S and Stirling, A. 2002. Finding a precautionary approach to technological development-lessons for the evaluation of GM crops. Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics, 15: 57-71.
31. Mellon, M. & Rissler, J. (2003). Environmental effects of genetically modified food crops-recent experiences. Union of Concerned Scientists. Retrieved from http://www.ucsusa.org/food_and_agriculture/science_and_impacts/impacts_genetic_engineering/environmental-effects-of.html
32. Merton, RK. 1942. Science and technology in a democratic social order. Journal of Legal and Political Sociology, 1(1942): 115-126.
33. Merton, RK. 1973. The sociology of science: Theoretical and empirical investigations, Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
34. Michaels, D and Monforton, C. 2005. Manufacturing uncertainty: Contested science and the protection of the public's health and environment. Public Health Matters, 95(S1): S39-S48.
35. Millstone, E., van Zwanenberg, P., Levidow, L., Spok, A., Hirakawa, H. & Matsuo, M. (2008). Risk assessment policies: Differences across jurisdictions. Luxembourg: Office for Official Publications of the European Communities. Retrieved fromhttp://ipts.jrc.ec.europa.eu/publications/pub.cfm?id=1562
36. Morris, S.H. & Spillane, C. (2010). EU GM crop regulation: A road to resolution or a regulatory roundabout? European Journal of Risk Research, 4, 359-369
37. Mulkay, M. 1979. Science and the sociology of knowledge, London: Allen and Unwin.
38. Myers, JP. 2009. Why public health agencies cannot depend on good laboratory practices as a criterion for selecting data: The case of bisphenol A. Environmental Health Perspectives, 117: 309-315.
39. Ricroch, A, Bergé, JB and Kuntz, M. 2010. Is the German suspension of MON810 maize cultivation scientifically justified?. Transgenic Research, 19: 1-12.
40. Rosi-Marshall E. J., et al. (2007) Toxins in transgenic crop byproducts may affect headwater stream ecosystems. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences USA 104, pp. 16204-16208
41. Sarewitz, D. 2011. The voice of science: Let's agree to disagree. Nature, 478: 7
42. Saxena, D and Stotzky, G. 2001. Bt corn has a higher lignin content than non-Bt corn. American Journal of Botany, 88: 1704-1706.
43. Schmidt, J. E. U., Braun, C. U., Whitehouse, L. P., Hilbeck, A. (2009). Effects of activated Bt transgene procucts (Cry1Ab, Cry3Bb) on immature stages of the ladybird Adalia bipunetata in laboratory ecotoxicity testing, Archives of Environmental Contamination and Toxicology, 56, pp. 221-228
44. Schubert, D. 2002. A different perspective on GM food. Nature Biotechnology, 20: 969
45. Séralini, GE, Cellier, D and Spiroux de Vendomois, J. 2007. New analysis of a rat feeding study with a genetically modified maize reveals signs of hepatorenal toxicity. Archives of Environmental Contamination Toxicology, 52: 596-602.
46. Stephenson, AL. 2010. Germany's ban of Monsanto's modified maize (MON810): A violation of international law. Trade, Law and Development, 11: 292-328.
47. Stirling, A. 2010. Keep it complex. Nature, 468: 1029-1031.
48. Torgersen, H and Seifert, F. 2000. Austria: Precautionary blockage of agricultural biotechnology. Journal of Risk Research, 3: 209-217.
49. US National Research Council. 2000. Genetically modified pest-protected plants: Science and regulation, Washington DC: National Academy Press.
50. Waltz, E. 2009a. Under wraps. Nature Biotechnology, 27: 880-882.
51. Waltz, E. 2009b. Battlefield. Nature, 461: 27-32.
52. Wickson, F. 2009. Reliability rating and reflective questioning: A case study of extended review on Australia's risk assessment of Bt cotton. Journal of Risk Research, 12(6): 749-770.
53. Wickson, F and Wynne, B. 2012. Avoiding the anglerfish deception in EU regulatory reform on GMOs. EMBO Reports, 13: 100-105.
54. Wynne, B. 2001. Creating public alienation: Expert cultures of risk and ethics on GMOs. Science as Culture, 10: 445-481.
55. Ziman, J. 1996. Postacademic science: Constructing knowledge with networks and norms. Science Studies, 9: 67-80.
56. ZKBS (2009). Statement of the ZKBS on the risk assessment of MON810-new studies on the environmental impact of MON810. Retrieved fromhttp://tinyurl.com/6fgpv22