Pathways of Conflict: Lessons from the Cultivation of MON810 in Germany in 2005–2008 for Emerging Conflicts over New Breeding Techniques

Friedrich, Beate

doi:10.3390/su12010144

Cited by 3 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 35 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…This enabled the commercial cultivation of MON810 maize, precipitating intense conflicts at cultivation sites as well as at federal state and national levels. Paradoxically, this amendment was not only the target of protest but it also gave both GMO proponents and the environmental movement opportunities to articulate their positions in a moment of public reasoning (Friedrich 2020, 5), culminating with the ban of MON810 maize in 2009. Although officially the ban occurred through the safeguard clause, due to technical risks associated with the product, political considerations played a significant role.…”

Section: Discussion: Comparing Regulatory Cultures and Governancementioning

confidence: 99%

“…Technical risks were further examined, for instance by the GeneRisk research project that was funded in the 2000s by the Federal Ministry of Education and Research (BMBF; Breckling et al 2012) and the Federal Agency for Nature Conservation (BfN; BfN n.d.). Other studies have also illustrated that political considerations, such as the likelihood of protests at cultivation sites, also played a role in the decision to ban MON810 (Friedrich 2020). For instance, a few weeks before the ban, in February 2009, the Green Party had proposed a general ban on all GMO cultivation in the country (Deutscher Bundestag 2009).…”

Section: Program-based Regulation In Germanymentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Governing Agricultural Biotechnologies in the United States, the United Kingdom, and Germany: A Trans-decadal Study of Regulatory Cultures

Ely

Friedrich

Glover

et al. 2022

Science, Technology, & Human Values

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Comparative studies of agricultural biotechnology regulation have highlighted differences in the roles that science and politics play in decision-making. Drawing on documentary and interview evidence in the United States, the United Kingdom, and Germany, we consider how the “regulatory cultures” that guided national responses to earlier generations of agricultural biotechnology have developed, alongside the emergence of genome editing in food crops. We find that aspects of the “product-based” regulatory approach have largely been maintained in US biosafety frameworks and that the British and German approaches have at different stages combined “process-based” and “programmatic” elements that address the scientific and sociopolitical novelty of genome editing to varying degrees. We seek to explain these patterns of stability and change by exploring how changing opportunity structures in each jurisdiction have enabled or constrained public reasoning around emerging agricultural biotechnologies. By showing how opportunity structures and regulatory cultures interact over the long-term, we provide insights that help us to interpret current and evolving dynamics in the governance of genome editing and the longer-term development of agricultural biotechnology.

show abstract

Section: Discussion: Comparing Regulatory Cultures and Governancementioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Program-based Regulation In Germanymentioning

confidence: 99%

Governing Agricultural Biotechnologies in the United States, the United Kingdom, and Germany: A Trans-decadal Study of Regulatory Cultures

Ely

Friedrich

Glover

et al. 2022

Science, Technology, & Human Values

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…There is currently ongoing controversy about the regulation of new gene-editing techniques because the strict regulatory policies, especially the regulatory framework in the EU, will restrict the application of genome-editing technology which has tremendous potential for improving crops although a very recent report from the European Commission presented a positive viewpoint on innovation in gene editing with maintaining a cautionary tone (Friedrich, 2020). 1 More efficient and robust gene-/genome-editing systems, including the components of their delivery systems with fewer off-target effects for plant species, will be updated continuously.…”

Section: Perspectivementioning

confidence: 99%

Applications and Major Achievements of Genome Editing in Vegetable Crops: A Review

Kim

Kang²,

Yang

et al. 2021

Front. Plant Sci.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The emergence of genome-editing technology has allowed manipulation of DNA sequences in genomes to precisely remove or replace specific sequences in organisms resulting in targeted mutations. In plants, genome editing is an attractive method to alter gene functions to generate improved crop varieties. Genome editing is thought to be simple to use and has a lower risk of off-target effects compared to classical mutation breeding. Furthermore, genome-editing technology tools can also be applied directly to crops that contain complex genomes and/or are not easily bred using traditional methods. Currently, highly versatile genome-editing tools for precise and predictable editing of almost any locus in the plant genome make it possible to extend the range of application, including functional genomics research and molecular crop breeding. Vegetables are essential nutrient sources for humans and provide vitamins, minerals, and fiber to diets, thereby contributing to human health. In this review, we provide an overview of the brief history of genome-editing technologies and the components of genome-editing tool boxes, and illustrate basic modes of operation in representative systems. We describe the current and potential practical application of genome editing for the development of improved nutritious vegetables and present several case studies demonstrating the potential of the technology. Finally, we highlight future directions and challenges in applying genome-editing systems to vegetable crops for research and product development.

show abstract

Towards social acceptability of genome-edited plants in industrialised countries? Emerging evidence from Europe, United States, Canada, Australia, New Zealand, and Japan

et al. 2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The agricultural biotechnology world has been divided into two blocks; countries adopting GM crops for commercial cultivation (adopters) and others without any or without relevant cultivation of such crops (non-adopters). Meanwhile, an increasing number of adopter countries have exempted certain genome-edited (GE) crops from legal GMO pre-market approval and labelling requirements. Among them are major exporters of agricultural commodities such as United States, Canada, and Australia. Due to the relaxed legislation more GE plants are expected to enter the market soon. Many countries in the non-adopter group, however, depend on import of large volumes of agricultural commodities from adopter countries. Unlike first generation GM, certain GE crops cannot be identified as unambiguously originating from genome editing using available techniques. Consequently, pressure is mounting on non-adopter jurisdictions to reconsider their policies and legislations. Against this backdrop, the paper explores recent developments relevant for social acceptability in selected non-adopters, Japan, New Zealand, the EU, Norway, and Switzerland in contrast to United States, Canada, and Australia. While Japan is already opening-up and Norway and Switzerland are discussing revisions of their policies, the EU and New Zealand are struggling with challenges resulting from high court decisions. In an attempt to take a closer look into the inner dynamics of these developments, the concept of social acceptability proposed by Wüstenhagen et al. (Energy Policy, 2007, 35(5), 2683–2691) is employed. This aids the understanding of developments in the jurisdictions considered and identifies specific or cross-cutting challenges.

show abstract

Pathways of Conflict: Lessons from the Cultivation of MON810 in Germany in 2005–2008 for Emerging Conflicts over New Breeding Techniques

Cited by 3 publications

References 35 publications

Governing Agricultural Biotechnologies in the United States, the United Kingdom, and Germany: A Trans-decadal Study of Regulatory Cultures

Governing Agricultural Biotechnologies in the United States, the United Kingdom, and Germany: A Trans-decadal Study of Regulatory Cultures

Applications and Major Achievements of Genome Editing in Vegetable Crops: A Review

Towards social acceptability of genome-edited plants in industrialised countries? Emerging evidence from Europe, United States, Canada, Australia, New Zealand, and Japan

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About