Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-vdxz6 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-24T11:47:38.413Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Making the EU “Risk Window” transparent: The normative foundations of the environmental risk assessment of GMOs

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  15 November 2003

Karsten Klint Jensen ,
Christian Gamborg ,
Kathrine Hauge Madsen ,
Rikke Bagger Jørgensen ,
Martin Krayer von Krauss ,
Anna Paldam Folker  and
Peter Sandøe
Karsten Klint Jensen
Affiliation:
Centre for Bioethics and Risk Assessment, Department of Education, Philosophy and Rhetoric, University of Copenhagen, Njalsgade 80, 2300 Copenhagen S, Denmark
Christian Gamborg
Affiliation:
Centre for Bioethics and Risk Assessment, Danish Forest and Landscape Research Institute, Hørsholm Kongevej 11, 2970 Hørsholm, Denmark
Kathrine Hauge Madsen
Affiliation:
Centre for Bioethics and Risk Assessment, Royal Veterinary and Agricultural University, Grønnegaardsvej 8, 1870 Frederiksberg C, Denmark
Rikke Bagger Jørgensen
Affiliation:
Centre for Bioethics and Risk Assessment, Plant Environment Interactions, Plant Research Department, RISØ National Laboratory, Building 309, Frederiksborgvej 399, PO Box 49, 4000 Roskilde, Denmark
Martin Krayer von Krauss
Affiliation:
Centre for Bioethics and Risk Assessment, Environment and Resources, Technical University of Denmark, Bygningstorvet, Building 115, 2800 Lyngby, Denmark
Anna Paldam Folker
Affiliation:
Centre for Bioethics and Risk Assessment, Royal Veterinary and Agricultural University, Grønnegaardsvej 8, 1870 Frederiksberg C, Denmark
Peter Sandøe
Affiliation:
Centre for Bioethics and Risk Assessment, Royal Veterinary and Agricultural University, Grønnegaardsvej 8, 1870 Frederiksberg C, Denmark

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.

In Europe, there seems to be widespread, morally based scepticism about the use of GMOs in food production. In response to this scepticism, the revised EU directive 2001/18/EC on the deliberate release into the environment of genetically modified organisms stresses the importance of respecting ethical principles recognized in the Member States. However, the directive fails to reflect the critical role of value judgements in scientific risk assessment and any subsequent approval procedure. In this paper we argue that it is important to make all ethically relevant assumptions involved in the approval procedure transparent and thus available for public scrutiny. Mapping the value judgements that are made in an environmental risk assessment and approval procedure, we describe the political liberal nature of the EU legislation. We then look more closely at the prescriptions for environmental risk assessment and approval of GMOs outlined in the directive. An environmental risk assessment views the world through a “risk window” that only makes visible that which has been predefined as a relevant risk. The importance of the value judgements that define the risk window consists in limiting the information the risk assessment can provide. In the penultimate section of the paper, the significance of the risk window is demonstrated through a case study of the approval of glyphosate resistant fodder beets (Beta vulgaris L. ssp. vulgaris) in Denmark.

Keywords

ethicsEU legislationfamiliaritypolitical liberalismtransparencyvalue judgementsrisk window
Type
Research Article
Information
Environmental Biosafety Research , Volume 2 , Issue 3 , July 2003 , pp. 161 - 171
Copyright
© ISBR, EDP Sciences, 2003

References

Biotechnology and the European Public Concerted Action Group (BEPCAG) (1997) Europe ambivalent on biotechnology. Nature 387: 845-847
CEC (1990) Council Directive 90/220/EEC of 23 April 1990 on the deliberate release into the environment of genetically modified organisms
CEC (1992) Opinions of Europeans on Biotechnology in 1991. Eurobarometer 35.1. Science Museum, London
CEC (1993) Biotechnology and Genetic Engineering: What Europeans Think about it in 1993. Eurobarometer 39.1. CEC, Brussels
CEC (1997) European Opinions on Modern Biotechnology. Eurobarometer 46.1. CEC, Brussels
CEC (2000a) The Europeans and Biotechnology. Eurobarometer 52.1. CEC, Brussels
CEC (2000b) Press Release of 13 July 2000. European Commission: press and information service IP/00/778
CEC (2000c) Communication from the Commission on the Precautionary Principle. CEC, Brussels
CEC (2001) Directive 2001/18/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 12 March 2001 on the deliberate release into the environment of genetically modified organisms and repealing Council Directive 90/220/EEC - Commission Declaration
Danish Ministry of Trade and Industry, The (2000) The Danish Government Statement on Ethics and Genetic Engineering. Copenhagen
EPA (1997) Notification C/DK/97/01. Summary of the evaluation carried out by the Danish competent authority
FAO (1997) Risk management and food safety. Report of a joint FAO/WHO consultation Rome, Italy, 27 to 31 January 1997. FAO Food and Nutrition Paper 65
Holtug, N (2000) The harm principle and genetically modified food. J. Agr. Environ. Ethic 14: 169-178
Jasanoff S (1990) The Fifth Branch: Science Advisers as Policymakers. Harvard University Press, Cambridge
Jensen, KK (2002) The Moral Foundation of the Precautionary Principle. J. Agr. Environ. Ethic 15: 39-55 CrossRef
Levidow L and Carr S (eds.) (2000) Precautionary Regulation: GM Crops in the European Union, J. Risk Res., Special Issue 3 (3)
Mill JS (1859) On Liberty. In Mill JS, ed, Utilitarianism, On Liberty, Considerations on Representative Government London Dent, 1993, pp 69-185
NFNA (1997) Vedr. anmeldelse af foderroe (Beta vulgaris L. ssp. vulgaris) til markedsføring, i henhold til del C, artikel 12(3) i Direktiv 90/220/EØF. Skov- og Naturstyrelsen.
NRC (1996) Understanding Risk: Informing Decisions in a Democratic Society. Academy Press, Washington D.C.
OECD (1993) Safety Considerations for Biotechnology: Scale-Up of Crop Plants. Publications Service, OECD, Paris
PD (1997) Vedr.: Vurdering af anmeldelse om markedsføring af en genetisk modificeret foderroe (C/DK/97/01). Plantedirektoratet.
Rawls J (1993) Political Liberalism. Columbia University Press, New York
Shrader-Frechette KS (1985) Risk Analysis and Scientific Method, Reidel, Dordrecht
Tømmerås BÅ, Johnsen Ø, Skrøppa T, Hindar K, Holten J, Tufto J (1996) Long-term environmental impacts of release of transgenic Norway spruce (Picea abies). Trondheim: NINA/NIKU, Foundation for Nature Research and Cultural Heritage Research
VFA (1997) Vedr. vurdering fra Instituttet for Toksikologi af ansøgning C/DK/97/01 om markedsføring af gensplejset foderroe A5/15. Veterinær- og Fødevaredirektoratet
WHO (1995) Application of Risk Analysis to Food Standards Issues, Report of the Joint FAO/WHO Expert Consultation, 13-17 March 1995, Geneva, Switzerland
Wynne B (1996) May the Sheep Safely Graze? A Reflexive View on the Expert-Lay Knowledge Divide. In Lash S, Szerszynski B and Wynne B, eds, Risk, Environment and Modernity. Towards a new Modernity. Sage, London, pp 44-83