Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-g8jcs Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-24T08:38:04.908Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Assessing some of the regulatory approaches to transgenic plants: What can we learn from the regulation of other technologies?

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  15 March 2004

Carl F. Cranor
Carl F. Cranor*
Affiliation:
Department of Philosophy, University of California, Riverside, CA 92521, USA
*
[email protected]

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

Transgenic plants result from the isolation and insertion of genes into plants by means other than conventional breeding techniques, making it possible to isolate a gene that controls a valuable trait without also inserting thousands of other genes, as can occur with other methods. Transgenic plants potentially can provide substantial benefits to humans, but they can also pose risks to ecosystems, nontarget species and even to humans. I utilize the U.S. regulatory experience with chemical substances to provide some background for locating the strengths and weaknesses of different legal structures as well as providing an opportunity to learn from them. Learning from that case study and different legal structures utilized therein, as well as from the state of the world in which transgenic plants will be introduced and the state of the relevant sciences combined with a National Research Council Report on transgenic plants, this essay assesses the regulatory procedures that the U.S. Department of Agriculture uses to evaluate the risks from transgenic plants. These legal structures, although well suited for identifying risks before there is extensive exposure, have a number of shortcomings for reviewing the products of a new and not well-understood technology. The U.S. could take some steps toward improving its reasonable, tiered, pre-market approach for reviewing the risks from transgenic plants by following the NRC recommendations and learning from shortcomings of the regulation of chemical risks. Whether it will be or not remains to be seen.

Keywords

transgenic plantschemical risksrisk assessmentlaws for assessing and regulating risks
Type
Research Article
Information
Environmental Biosafety Research , Volume 3 , Issue 1 , January 2004 , pp. 29 - 43
Copyright
© ISBR, EDP Sciences, 2004

References

Bailor JC (2002) Personal communication at Collegium Ramazzini
Berger MA (1997) Eliminating general causation: notes towards a new theory of justice and toxic torts, Columbia Law Review 97: 2117–2152
Brown LR, Flavin C, French H (2000) State of the world 2000, New York, WW Norton, Co
Cranor CF (1993, 1997) Regulating toxic substances. New York, Oxford University Press
Cranor CF (1999) Asymmetric information, the precautionary principle and burdens of proof in environmental health protections. In Raffensperger C, Tickner J, eds, Protecting public health and the environment: Implementing the precautionary principle, Washington DC, Island Press, pp 74–99
Cranor CF (2003a) Some legal implications of the precautionary principle, Eur. J. Oncology 2: 31–51
Cranor CF (2003b) What could precautionary science be? Research for early warnings and a better future. In Tickner J, Precaution, environmental science, and preventive public policy, Island Press, Washington DC, pp 305–319
Eastmond DA (2002) Personal communication
Ellstrand NC (2001) When transgenes wander, should we worry?, Plant Physiol. 125: 1543–1545
EPA, EDF, CMA agree on testing program targeting 2800 chemicals, Envtl. Health Letter Silver Spring, MD, Business Publishers, Inc., Oct 1998, 37: 193
Ellstrand NC (2003) Personal communication
European Environmental Agency (2001) Late lessons from early warnings: The precautionary principle, Copenhagen, pp 1896–2000
Green MD (2000) Safety as an element of pharmaceutical quality: the respective roles of regulation and tort law, St. Louis U. Law J. 42: 163–190
Huff J, Melnick R (2002) Chemical carcinogenesis bioassays: critical for the sensible application of the precautionary principle for protecting public health. Presentation to Collegium Ramazzini, October 23–24, 2002
Lubchenco J (1998) Entering the century of the environment: A new social contract for science, Science 279: 491–497
Markowitz G, Rosner D (2002) Deceit and denial: The deadly politics of industrial pollution, Berkeley, University of California Press
National Research Council (1984) Toxicity testing: strategies to determine needs and priorities, Washington DC, National Academy Press
National Research Council (2002) Environmental effects of transgenic plants: the scope and adequacy of regulation, Washington DC, National Academy Press
Rodgers WH Jr. (1994) Environmental law, 2nd edn, Minneapolis, MN, West Publishing, Co
Sears MK, Hellmich RL, Stanley-Horn DE, et al. (2001) Impact of Bt corn pollen on monarch butterfly populations a risk assessment, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. 98: 11937–11942 CrossRef
US Congress, Office of Technology Assessment (1987) Identifying and regulating carcinogens. Washington DC, US Government Printing Office
US Congress, Office of Technology Assessment (1995) Screening and testing chemicals in commerce. Washington DC, US Government Printing Office