Biotechnology regulation as symbolic normalization

In the “risk” controversy around agricultural biotechnology, at stake is the legitimay of this innovation, particularly the release of genetically modified organisms (GMOs). It has faced potential obstacles to RD to overcome the perceived abnonnalip of GMOs; to avoid political protest; and to standardize safety criteria. In the UK and its EC framework, process-based legislation has had a precautionay content, designed to consider a broad range of ecological uncertainties which could be translated into technical evidence of safety. Given that all stages of risk management entail environmental value judgements, its procedures bear some potential for greater public involvement. Since process-based replation was enacted in 1990, industy has attacked it for hindering the commercial competitiveness of the European biotechnology industy. This attack more likely aims to limit the ...

[1]  Robert K. Colwell,et al.  The Planned Introduction of Genetically Engineered Organisms: Ecological Considerations and Recommendations , 1989 .

[2]  M. Balter.  How Europe regulates its genes. , 1991, Science.

[3]  Sheila Jasanoff,et al.  Risk management and political culture , 1986 .

[4]  H. Gottweis.  German Politics of Genetic Engineering and its Deconstruction , 1995, Social studies of science.

[5]  J. Durant,et al.  Attitudes of selected public groups in the UK to biotechnology. , 1992 .

[6]  Brian Wynne,et al.  Rationality and ritual: The Windscale Inquiry and nuclear decisions in Britain , 1982 .

[7]  Erik Baark,et al.  Biotechnology and culture: the impact of public debates on government regulation in the United States and Denmark. , 1990, Technology in society.

[8]  J. Durant,et al.  Eurobarometer 35.1. Opinions of Europeans on biotechnology in 1991. , 1992 .

[9]  M. Chiara Mantegazzini.  The Environmental Risks from Biotechnology , 1986 .

[10]  S. Cooper.  1989 Annual Report , 1989 .

[11]  Les Levidow,et al.  The greening of biotechnology: GMOs as environment-friendly products , 1991 .

[12]  H Roberts,et al.  Risk Society: Towards a New Modernity , 1994 .

[13]  J. Hodgson.  Europe, Maastricht, and Biotechnology , 1992, Bio/Technology.

[14]  J. Tait,et al.  Risk regulation and strategic decision making in biotechnology: the political economy of innovation , 1993 .

[15]  Les Levidow,et al.  Release of genetically modified organisms: precautionary legislation , 1992 .

[16]  M. Schwarz,et al.  Divided We Stand: Re-Defining Politics, Technology, and Social Choice , 1990 .

[17]  G. T. Tzotzos,et al.  Public perception of biotechnology. , 1995 .

[18]  Sol Picciotto,et al.  The Internationalisation of the State , 1991 .

[19]  B. Wynne,et al.  Regulating Environmental Risks: A Comparative Perspective , 1987 .

[20]  Biotechnology policy in Europe: a critical evaluation , 1993 .

[21]  Les Levidow,et al.  Proactive and reactive approaches to risk regulation , 1992 .

[22]  Les Levidow,et al.  Advice on biotechnology regulation: the remit and composition of Britain's ACRE , 1993 .

[23]  J. Tooze.  Genetic engineering in Europe. , 1977, New scientist.

[24]  S. Krimsky.  Biotechnics and Society: The Rise of Industrial Genetics, Sheldon Krimsky. 1991. Greenwood Press, Inc., Westport, CT. 280 pages. ISBN: 0-275-93860-3. $17.95 , 1994 .