Elicitation of Expert Judgments of Uncertainty in the Risk Assessment of Herbicide‐Tolerant Oilseed Crops

One of the lay public's concerns about genetically modified (GM) organisms (GMO) and related emerging technologies is that not all the important risks are evaluated or even identified yet--and that ignorance of the unanticipated risks could lead to severe environmental or public health consequences. To some degree, even the scientists who participated in the analysis of the risks from GMOs (arguably the people most qualified to critique these analyses) share some of this concern. To formally explore the uncertainty in the risk assessment of a GM crop, we conducted detailed interviews of seven leading experts on GM oilseed crops to obtain qualitative and quantitative information on their understanding of the uncertainties associated with the risks to agriculture from GM oilseed crops (canola or rapeseed). The results of these elicitations revealed three issues of potential concern that are currently left outside the scope of risk assessments. These are (1) the potential loss of the agronomic and environmental benefits of glyphosate (a herbicide widely used in no-till agriculture) due to the combined problems of glyphosate-tolerant canola and wheat volunteer plants, (2) the growing problem of seed lot contamination, and (3) the potential market impacts. The elicitations also identified two areas where knowledge is insufficient. These are: the occurrence of hybridization between canola and wild relatives and the ability of the hybrids to perpetuate themselves in nature, and the fate of the herbicide-tolerance genes in soil and their interaction with soil microfauna and -flora. The methodological contribution of this work is a formal approach to analyzing the uncertainty surrounding complex problems.

[1]  Erle C. Ellis,et al.  LONG-TERM CHANGE IN VILLAGE-SCALE ECOSYSTEMS IN CHINA USING LANDSCAPE AND STATISTICAL METHODS , 2000 .

[2]  E. Shevliakova,et al.  Elicitation of Expert Judgments of Climate Change Impacts on Forest Ecosystems , 2001 .

[3]  Mario Giampietro,et al.  The Precautionary Principle and Ecological Hazards of Genetically Modified Organisms , 2002, Ambio.

[4]  T. Traavik,et al.  The Precautionary Principle: Scientific Uncertainty and Omitted Research in the Context of GMO Use and Release , 2002 .

[5]  T Reichhardt,et al.  Long-term effect of GM crops serves up food for thought , 1999, Nature.

[6]  Les Levidow,et al.  Exploring the Links Between Science, Risk, Uncertainty, and Ethics in Regulatory Controversies About Genetically Modified Crops , 2000 .

[7]  B. Wynne,et al.  Creating Public Alienation: Expert Cultures of Risk and Ethics on GMOs , 2001, Science as culture.

[8]  Warren E. Walker,et al.  Defining Uncertainty: A Conceptual Basis for Uncertainty Management in Model-Based Decision Support , 2003 .

[9]  J. Proops,et al.  Humankind and the Environment: An Anatomy of Surprise and Ignorance , 1992, Environmental Values.

[10]  Andrew Stirling,et al.  A Novel Approach to the Appraisal of Technological Risk: A Multicriteria Mapping Study of a Genetically Modified Crop , 2001 .

[11]  M. G. Morgan,et al.  Uncertainty in risk assessment. , 1985, Environmental science & technology.

[12]  Gene Rowe,et al.  Perspectives on Expertise in the Aggregation of Judgments , 1992 .

[13]  David W. Keith,et al.  When is it appropriate to combine expert judgments? , 1996 .