Towards a more open debate about values in decision-making on agricultural biotechnology

Transgenic Research

Volumn 23, Issue 6, 2014, Pages 933-943

  Devos, Yann ^a   Sanvido, Olivier ^b,c   Tait, Joyce ^d   Raybould, Alan ^e  

^a EUROPEAN FOOD SAFETY AUTHORITY   (Italy)

^b AGROSCOPE RECKENHOLZ TÄNIKON RESEARCH STATION ART   (Switzerland)

^c State Secretariat for Eco Affairs   (Switzerland)

^d UNIVERSITY OF EDINBURGH   (United Kingdom)

^e JEALOTT S HILL INTERNATIONAL RESEARCH CENTRE   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Controversy; Environmental risk assessment; Genetically modified plants; Governance; Values

Indexed keywords

BIOTECHNOLOGY; CROP; DECISION MAKING; ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING; HUMAN; LEGISLATION AND JURISPRUDENCE; MANAGEMENT; RISK ASSESSMENT; TRANSGENIC PLANT;

BIOTECHNOLOGY; CROPS, AGRICULTURAL; DECISION MAKING; ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING; HUMANS; PLANTS, GENETICALLY MODIFIED; POLICY MAKING; RISK ASSESSMENT;

EID: 84916878865     PISSN: 09628819     EISSN: 15739368     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s11248-013-9754-z     Document Type: Article

References (90)

1. ACRE (2007) Managing the footprint of agriculture: towards a comparative assessment of risks and benefits for novel agricultural systems. Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (DEFRA), United Kingdom. Available from http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20080727101330/http:/www.defra.gov.uk/environment/acre/fsewiderissues/pdf/acre-wi-final.pdf
2. Arjó G, Portero M, Piñol C, Viñas J, Matias-Guiu X, Capell T, Bartholomaeus A, Parrott W, Christou P (2013) Plurality of opinion, scientific discourse and pseudoscience: an in depth analysis of the Séralini et al. study claiming that Roundup™ Ready corn or the herbicide Roundup™ cause cancer in rats. Transgenic Res 22:255–267
3. Carpenter JE (2011) Impacts of GM crops on biodiversity. GM Crops 2:1–17
4. COGEM (2009) Socio-economic aspects of GMOs: building blocks for an EU sustainability assessment of genetically modified crops. Commission on Genetic Modification (COGEM), The Netherlands. Available from http://ec.europa.eu/food/food/biotechnology/reports_studies/docs/Netherlands_annex_Cogem_report_en.pdf
5. Collins H, Weinel M, Evans R (2010) The politics and policy of the third wave: new technologies and society. Crit Policy Stud 4:185–201
6. Craig W, Tepfer M, Degrassi G, Ripandelli D (2008) An overview of general features of risk assessments of genetically modified crops. Euphytica 164:853–880
7. Deblonde M, du Jardin P (2005) Deepening a precautionary European policy. J Agric Environ Ethic 18:319–343
8. Devos Y, Maeseele P, Reheul D, Van Speybroeck L, De Waele D (2008) Ethics in the societal debate on genetically modified organisms: a (re)quest for Sense and Sensibility. J Agric Environ Ethic 21:29–61
9. Devos Y, Hails RS, Messéan A, Perry JN, Squire GR (2012) Feral genetically modified herbicide tolerant oilseed rape from seed import spills: are concerns scientifically justified? Transgenic Res 21:1–21
10. Devos Y, Aguilera J, Diveki Z, Gomes A, Liu Y, Paoletti C, du Jardin P, Herman L, Perry JN, Waigmann E (2013) EFSA’s scientific activities and achievements on the risk assessment of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) during its first decade of existence—looking back and ahead. Transgenic Res. doi:10.1007/s11248-013-9741-4
11. EC (2011) Report from the Commission to the European Parliament and the Council on socio-economic implications of GMO cultivation on the basis of Member States contributions, as requested by the Conclusions of the Environment Council of December 2008. European Commission (EC), Belgium. Available from http://ec.europa.eu/food/plant/gmo/reports_studies/docs/socio_economic_report_gmo_en.pdf
12. Eckerstorfer M, Gaugitsch H (2013) Framing socio-economic assessment in GMO & chemicals regulation. Workshop report. European Environment Agency (EEA), Denmark. Available from http://www.umweltbundesamt.at/fileadmin/site/umweltthemen/gentechnik/EEA-SEA_Dec2012/Summary-report_EEA-Workshop-SEA_6-7Dec2012.pdf
13. EFSA (2008) Environmental risk assessment of genetically modified plants—challenges and approaches. EFSA scientific colloquium series 8, June 2007. European Food Safety Authority (EFSA), Italy. Available from http://www.efsa.europa.eu/en/supporting/doc/colloquiagmoera.pdf
14. EFSA (2011) Statistical significance and biological relevance. EFSA J 9:1–17
15. Evans J, Wood G, Miller A (2006) The risk assessment–policy gap: an example from the UK contaminated land regime. Environ Int 32:1066–1071
16. Garcia-Alanso M, Raybould A (2013) Protection goals in environmental risk assessment: a practical approach. Transgenic Res (in press)
17. Gaskell G, Einsiedel E, Hallman W, Priest SH, Jackson J, Olsthoorn J (2005) Social values and the governance of science. Science 310:1908–1909
18. Genus A, Coles AM (2005) On constructive technology assessment and limitations on public participation in Technology Assessment. Technol Anal Strateg 17:433–443
19. Gray AJ (2004) Ecology and government policies: the GM crop debate. J Appl Ecol 41:1–10
20. Gray A (2012) Problem formulation in environmental risk assessment for genetically modified crops: a practitioner’s approach. Collect Biosafety Rev 6:10–65
21. Greiter A, Miklau M, Heissenberger A, Gaugitsch H (2011) Socioeconomic aspects in the assessment of GMOs—options for action. Environment Agency Austria Vienna, 2011, Reports, Band 0354, ISBN: 978-3-99004-157-4. Umweltbundesamt, Austria. Available from http://www.umweltbundesamt.at/fileadmin/site/publikationen/REP0354.pdf
22. Hagendijk R, Irwin A (2006) Public deliberation and governance: engaging with science and technology in contemporary Europe. Minerva 44:167–184
23. Hayes KR (2011) Uncertainty and uncertainty analysis methods: Issues in quantitative and qualitative risk modeling with application to import risk assessment ACERA project (0705). Report number: EP102467. Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation (CSIRO), Australia. Available from http://www.acera.unimelb.edu.au/materials/endorsed/0705a_final-report.pdf
24. Herman R, Garcia-Alonso M, Layton R, Raybould A (2013) Bringing policy relevance and scientific discipline to ERA for GM crops. Trends Biotechnol 31:493–496
25. Herrick C, Jamieson D (2001) Junk science and environmental policy: obscuring public debate with misleading discourse. Philos Public Policy Q 21:11–16
26. Hilbeck A, Meier M, Römbke J, Jänsch S, Teichmann H, Tappeser B (2011) Environmental risk assessment of genetically modified plants—concepts and controversies. Environ Sci Eur 23:1–12
27. Hilbeck A, Meier M, Trtikova M (2012) Underlying reasons of the controversy over adverse effects of Bt toxins on lady beetle and lacewing larvae. Environ Sci Eur 24:1–5
28. Hill RA, Sendashonga C (2003) General principles for risk assessment of living modified organisms: lessons from chemical risk assessment. Environ Biosafety Res 2:81–88
29. Irwin A (2006) The politics of talk: coming to terms with the ‘new’ scientific governance. Soc Stud Sci 36:299–320
30. Jaffe G (2006) Regulatory slowdown on GM crop decisions. Nat Biotechnol 24:748–749
31. Jasanoff S (2003) Technologies of humility: citizen participation in governing science. Minerva 41:223–244
32. Jensen KK, Gamborg C, Madsen KH, Jørgensen RB, Krayer von Krauss M, Folker AP, Sandøe P (2003) Making the EU ‘risk window’ transparent: the normative foundation of risk assessment of GMOs. Environ Biosafety Res 3:161–171
33. Johnson KL, Raybould A, Hudoson MD, Poppy GM (2007) How does scientific risk assessment of GM crops fit within the wider risk analysis? Trends Plant Sci 12:1–5
34. Karlsson M (2003) Ethics of sustainable development—a study of Swedish regulations for genetically modified organisms. J Agric Environ Ethic 16:51–62
35. Kuntz M (2012) The postmodern assault on science. EMBO Rep 13:885–889
36. Kuntz M, Davison J, Ricroch AE (2013) What the French ban of Bt MON810 maize means for science-based risk assessment. Nat Biotechnol 33:498–500
37. Lackey RT (2007) Science, scientists and policy advocacy. Conserv Biol 21:12–17
38. Lawton JH (2007) Ecology, politics and policy. J Appl Ecol 44:465–474
39. Lemaux PG (2009) Genetically engineered plants and foods: a scientist’s analysis of the issues (Part II). Ann Rev Plant Biol 60:511–559
40. Leshner AI (2005) Where science meets society. Science 307:815
41. Lusser M, Raney T, Tillie P, Dillen K, Rodríguez Cerezo E (2012) International workshop on socioeconomic impacts of genetically modified crops co-organised by JRCIPTS and FAO; JRC Science and Policy reports EUR 25265 EN. Joint Research Centre (JRC), Spain. Available from http://www.fao.org/docrep/015/ap016e/ap016e.pdf
42. Madsen KH, Sandøe P (2005) Ethical reflections on herbicide-resistant crops. Pest Manag Sci 61:318–325
43. Marsden T (2008) Agri-food contestations in rural space: GM in its regulatory context. Geoforum 39:191–203
44. Masip G, Sabalza M, Pérez-Massot E, Banakar R, Cebrian D, Twyman RM, Capell T, Albajes R, Christou P (2013) Paradoxical EU agricultural policies on genetically engineered crops. Trends Plant Sci 18:312–324
45. Mayer S, Stirling A (2002) Finding a precautionary approach to technological development—lessons for the evaluation of GM crops. J Agric Environ Ethic 15:57–71
46. Mayer S, Stirling A (2004) GM crops: good or bad? EMBO Rep 5:1021–1024
47. Miller HI, Morandini P, Ammann K (2008) Is biotechnology a victim of anti-science bias in scientific journals? Trends Biotechol 26:122–125
48. Montpetit E, Rouillard C (2008) Culture and the democratization of risk management: the widening biotechnology gap between Canada and France. Admin Soc 39:907–930
49. Morris SH, Spillane C (2010) EU GM crop regulation: a road to resolution or a regulatory roundabout? Eur J Risk Res 4:359–369
50. Myhr AI, Traavik T (2003) Sustainable development and Norwegian genetic engineering regulations: applications, impacts and challenges. J Agric Environ Ethic 16:317–335
51. Nature (2007) Directive action required. Nature 450:921
52. Nature (2013) GM crops: a story in numbers. Nature 497:22–23
53. Nienstedt KM, Brock TCM, van Wensum J, Montforts M, Hart A, Aagaard A, Alix A, Boesten J, Bopp SK, Brown C, Capri E, Forbes V, Köpp H, Liess M, Luttik R, Maltby L, Sousa JP, Streissl F, Hardy AR (2012) Development of a framework based on an ecosystem services approach for deriving specific protection goals for environmental risk assessment of pesticides. Sci Total Environ 415:31–38
54. Nowotny H (2003) Democratising expertise and socially robust knowledge. Sci Public Policy 30:151–156
55. OGTR (2013) Risk analysis framework. Office of the Gene Technology Regulator (OGTR), Australia. Available from http://www.ogtr.gov.au/internet/ogtr/publishing.nsf/content/42D3AAD51452D5ECCA2574550015E69F/$File/raffinal5_2.pdf
56. Perry JN, ter Braak CJF, Dixon PM, Duan JJ, Hails RS, Huesken A, Lavielle A, Marvier M, Scardi M, Schmidt K, Tothmeresz B, Schaarschmidt F, van der Voet H (2009) Statistical aspects of environmental risk assessment of GM plants for effects on non-target organisms. Environ Biosafety Res 8:65–78
57. Ramessar K, Capell T, Twyman RM, Quemada H, Christou P (2009) Calling the tunes on transgenic crops: the case for regulatory harmony. Mol Breed 23:99–112
58. Rauschen S (2010) A case of “pseudo science”? A study claiming effects of the Cry1Ab protein on larvae of the two-spotted ladybird is reminiscent of the case of the green lacewing. Transgenic Res 19:13–16
59. Raybould A (2006) Problem formulation and hypothesis testing for environmental risk assessment of genetically modified crops. Environ Biosafety Res 5:119–125
60. Raybould A (2007) Ecological versus ecotoxicological methods for assessing the environmental risks of transgenic crops. Plant Sci 173:589–602
61. Raybould A (2010) Reducing uncertainty in regulatory decision-making for transgenic crops. More ecological research or clearer environmental risk assessment? GM Crops 1:1–7
62. Raybould A (2011) The bucket and the searchlight: formulating and testing risk hypotheses about the weediness and invasiveness potential of transgenic crops. Environ Biosafety Res 9:123–133
63. Raybould A (2013) Can science justify regulatory decisions about the cultivation of transgenic crops? Transgenic Res 21:691–698
64. Raybould A, Poppy GM (2012) Commercializing genetically modified crops under EU regulations: objectives and barriers. GM Crops Food Biotechnol Agric Food Chain 3:1–12
65. Raybould A, Quemada H (2010) Bt crops and food security in developing countries: realised benefits, sustainable use and lowering barriers to adoption. Food Sec 2:247–259
66. Ricroch A, Bergé JB, Kuntz M (2010) Is the German suspension of MON810 maize cultivation scientifically justified? Transgenic Res 19:1–12
67. Romeis J, Hellmich RL, Candolfi MP, Carstens K, De Schrijver A, Gatehouse AMR, Herman RA, Huesing JE, McLean MA, Raybould A, Shelton AM, Waggoner A (2011) Recommendations for the design of laboratory studies on non-target arthropods for risk assessment of genetically engineered plants. Transgenic Res 20:1–22
68. Romeis J, McLean MA, Shelton AM (2013) When bad science makes good headlines: Bt maize and regulatory bans. Nat Biotechnol 31:386–387
69. Sabalza M, Miralpeix B, Twyman RM, Capell T, Christou P (2011) EU legitimizes GM crop exclusion zones. Nat Biotechnol 29:315–317
70. Sanvido O, Romeis J, Bigler F (2007) Ecological impacts of genetically modified crops: ten years of field research and commercial cultivation. Adv Biochem Eng Biotechnol 107:235–278
71. Sanvido O, Romeis J, Gathmann A, Gielkens M, Raybould A, Bigler F (2012) Evaluating environmental risks of genetically modified crops: ecological harm criteria for regulatory decision-making. Environ Sci Policy 15:82–91
72. Sarewitz D (2004) How science makes environmental controversies worse. Environ Sci Policy 7:385–403
73. Sarewitz D (2007) Liberating science from politics. Am Sci 94:104–106
74. Semenov AV, van Elsas JD, Glandorf DCM, Schilthuizen M, de Boer WF (2013) The use of statistical tools in field testing of putative effects of genetically modified plants on nontarget organisms. Ecol Evol 3:2739–2750
75. Sinha G (2009) Up in arms. Nat Biotechnol 27:592–594
76. Stirling A (2007) Risk, precaution and science: towards a more constructive policy debate. EMBO Rep 8:309–315
77. Stirling A (2008) “Opening up” and “closing down”: power, participation, and pluralism in the social appraisal of technology. Sci Technol Hum Values 33:262–294
78. Sunstein CR (2009) Going to extremes: how like minds unite and divide. Oxford University Press, Oxford
79. Tait J (2001) More Faust than Frankenstein: the European debate about the precautionary principle and risk regulation for genetically modified crops. J Risk Res 4:175–189
80. Tait J (2008) Risk governance of genetically modified crops: European and American perspectives. In: Renn O, Walker K (eds) Global risk governance: concept and practice using the IRGC framework. Springer, Dordrecht, pp 133–153
81. Tait J (2009) Upstream engagement and the governance of science. EMBO Rep 10:518–522
82. Tait J, Barker G (2011) Global food security and the governance of modern biotechnologies. EMBO Rep 12:763–768
83. US EPA (1998) Guidelines for ecological risk assessment. EPA/630/R095/002F. US Environmental Protection Agency, United States of America. Available from http://www.epa.gov/raf/publications/pdfs/ECOTXTBX.PDF
84. Waltz E (2009) Battlefield. Nature 461:27–32
85. WHO (2008) Uncertainty and data quality in exposure assessment. World Health Organisation (WHO), Switzerland. Available from http://www.who.int/ipcs/publications/methods/harmonization/exposure_assessment.pdf
86. Wickson F, Wynne B (2012a) Ethics of science for policy in the environmental governance of biotechnology: MON810 maize in Europe. Ethic Policy Environ 15:321–340
87. Wickson F, Wynne B (2012b) The anglerfish deception. EMBO Rep 13:100–105
88. Wilkinson MJ, Sweet J, Poppy GM (2003) Risk assessment of GM plants: avoiding gridlock? Plant Sci 8:208–212
89. Winickoff D, Jasanoff S, Busch L, Grove-White R, Wynne B (2005) Adjudicating the GM food wars: science, risk, and democracy in world trade law. Yale J Int Law 30:81–123
90. Wolt JD, Keese P, Raybould A, Fitzpatrick JW, Burachik M, Gray A, Olin SS, Schiemann J, Sears M, Wu F (2010) Problem formulation in the environmental risk assessment for genetically modified plants. Transgenic Res 19:425–436