Biotechnology in Europe: contentions in the risk-regulation debate

Shohet, Simon

doi:10.1093/spp/23.2.117

Cited by 3 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Australia lagged behind other countries, notably in Europe (Shohet 1996), in establishing a framework for biotechnology regulation, despite earlier calls for such a framework (House of Representatives SCIST 1992). Even after the eventual establishment of such a framework in the form of the Office of the Gene Technology Regulator, the authority of this federal regulation was undermined by state moratoria on GMOs in every state of Australia (Deakin 2008).…”

Section: Summary Of Analysismentioning

confidence: 99%

Technology assessment in Australia: the case for a formal agency to improve advice to policy makers

Russell

Vanclay

Salisbury³

et al. 2010

Policy Sci

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The pace and reach of technological change has led to calls for better technology policy and governance to improve social outcomes. Technology assessment can provide information and processes to improve technology policy. Having conducted a review of international best practice, we established a set of quality criteria for TA. In effect, good technology assessments are systematic, broad, inclusive and well resourced and are conducted by organisations that are trustworthy and influential. Although not having a formal TA agency, Australia does have a number of recent examples of TA-like activities in the form of ad hoc processes (such as reviews and inquiries) and within other organisations. Drawing on reports, commentaries, discussions and our observations as participants, we have assessed these activities and processes against our quality criteria. Our findings indicate that TA capacity in Australia is fragmented, uncoordinated and variable in quality and impact. We conclude that a formal TA agency could improve Australian technology policy and capacity for technology governance that would be more in line with other nations, notably in Europe.

show abstract

Section: Summary Of Analysismentioning

confidence: 99%

Technology assessment in Australia: the case for a formal agency to improve advice to policy makers

Russell

Vanclay

Salisbury³

et al. 2010

Policy Sci

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…While different European nations have taken different approaches to GM regulation, the general tendency, established by two European Union Directives and their amendments, has been to single out GMOs as a distinct category of organisms on the basis of the novel character of the process whereby they have been created and to regulate them with dedicated legislation (Jasanoff, 1995;Levidow et al, 1996;Shohet, 1996).…”

Section: Europementioning

confidence: 99%

The case for regulating intragenic GMOs

Russell

Sparrow

2007

J Agric Environ Ethics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper discusses the ethical and regulatory issues raised by ''intragenics'' -organisms that have been genetically modified using gene technologies, but that do not contain DNA from another species. Considering the rapid development of knowledge about gene regulation and genomics, we anticipate rapid advances in intragenic methods. Of regulatory systems developed to govern genetically modified organisms (GMOs) in North America, Europe, Australia, and New Zealand, the Australian system stands out in explicitly excluding intragenics from regulation. European systems are also under pressure to exclude intragenics from regulation. We evaluate recent arguments that intragenics are safer and more morally acceptable than transgenic organisms, and more acceptable to the public, which might be thought to justify a lower standard of regulation. We argue that the exemption of intragenics from regulation is not justified, and that there may be significant environmental risks associated with them. We conclude that intragenics should be subject to the same standard of regulation as other GMOs.

show abstract

Regulating risks within complex sociotechnical systems: Evidence from critical infrastructure cybersecurity standards

Clark‐Ginsberg

Slayton

2018

Science and Public Policy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Biotechnology in Europe: contentions in the risk-regulation debate

Cited by 3 publications

References 0 publications

Technology assessment in Australia: the case for a formal agency to improve advice to policy makers

Technology assessment in Australia: the case for a formal agency to improve advice to policy makers

The case for regulating intragenic GMOs

Regulating risks within complex sociotechnical systems: Evidence from critical infrastructure cybersecurity standards

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About