1 / 12

Innovations in Biotechnology: Public Perceptions & Cultural Attitudes

Innovations in Biotechnology: Public Perceptions & Cultural Attitudes. Drew L. Kershen Earl Sneed Centennial Prof. Univ. of Oklahoma Law School Copyright 2004, Drew L. Kershen, all rights reserved. Introduction.

Antony
Télécharger la présentation

Innovations in Biotechnology: Public Perceptions & Cultural Attitudes

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Innovations in Biotechnology:Public Perceptions & Cultural Attitudes Drew L. Kershen Earl Sneed Centennial Prof. Univ. of Oklahoma Law School Copyright 2004, Drew L. Kershen, all rights reserved

  2. Introduction • Agricultural Biotechnology – the debate is not about facts, information, policy compromises • Contending paradigms about humankind, nature, food, science, trade, intellectual property • Galileo/Ptolemy; Darwin/Lysenko; Borlaug/Ho • Agricultural Biotechnology – either accepted and used or stigmatized and shunned

  3. China – Treasure Fleets 1405-1433 Technological superiority Voyages of exploration Admiral Zheng He vs Confucians – power struggle Stability, purity, precaution – Confucian virtues Within 8 decades, China gave up its technological superiority to Portugal 1789 United States Constitution – Progress of Science and Useful Arts 1793 Patent Office Stable legal protection for inventions & discoveries Diamond v. Chakrabarty (1980); J.E.M. Ag Supply, Inc. v. Pioneer Hi-Bred Int’l, Inc. (2001) Development as Freedom Historical Examples

  4. Europe Different in kind New laws, regulations and agencies – the technology itself Technology assessment – determine the future European Political leadership – tepid or hostile United States No fundamental difference – No new regulatory issues Same laws, agencies – the products of the technology No a priori determination – the future decides Political leadership generally supportive – calming The Nature of Agricultural Biotechnology

  5. Europe, precautionary principle Hypothetical or imagined risks Risks govern, benefits ignored Burden to proof – prove no risks, no harm Risk – zero tolerance – pervasive distrust Food purity – pollution, contamination, segregation – categorical imperative, not risk analysis US, precautionary approach Identifiable harms; scientific evaluation Burden to prove safe – non-discrimination Benefit/Risk Balance – pervasive trust Food safety – safe, nutritious foods – culinary arts, not the essence of the food, makes the meal Precautionary Principle or Precautionary Approach

  6. Europe Process-based mandatory labelling Consumer confidence Consumer choice Regulation, not markets Stigma Food scares – food ingredient avoidance Additional burdens and costs – rent-seeking behaviour United States Material facts – mandatory Freedom not to speak Voluntary labels – not false or misleading Niche Markets Differentiate products Niche consumers pay for the additional information Consumer choice GMO free Organic production Food Labels

  7. Atlantic Separation International Fora • International Fora • Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety • Codex Alimentarius • FAO/WHO • Public policy choices • Prohibition – The European reality • Precaution – The European paradigm • Permissive – The Developing World ? • Promotional – The United States paradigm

  8. EU Domestic Risk Bleak Future in a hostile climate Industry -- Loss of competitiveness – Next wave of technology Loss of scientific and entrepreneurial expertise US at no risk The paradigm does not govern American production The NAFTA markets – dual chains of commodity trade EU International Risk Development as Freedom – food security, demographics, technology transfer China & India Technological capacity Large domestic markets Domestic Public policy Europe at risk to China & India Going ForwardRisks for Europe

  9. The Paradigm Gambit • Scientific Ignorance, Ideological Motives, Moral Risk • Historical Choice • China – 1433 • Future Risk – the outcome in several decades • Science, technology, trade flows equally from East to West as West to East

  10. References • L. Levathes, When China Ruled the Seas: The Treasure Fleet of the Dragon Throne, 1405-1433 (Oxford Univ. Press, 1994) • A. Sen, Development as Freedom (Oxford Univ. Press, 1999) • EC, Towards a Strategic Vision of Life Science and Biotechnology: A Consultation Document, COM (2001) 454 Final (04.09.2001) • VIB, Safety of Genetically Engineered Crops (June 5, 2000) < http://www.vib.be >.

  11. References • Nat’l Econ. Res. Assoc., Economic Appraisal of Options for Extension of Legislation on GM Labeling (London, May 2001) < http://www.nera.com > • R. Paarlberg, The Politics of Precaution: Genetically Modified Crops in Developing Countries (John Hopkins Univ. Press, 2001) • UNDP Report 2001, Making New Technologies Work for Human Development (Oxford. Univ. Press, 2001)

  12. References • Asian Development Bank, Agricultural Biotechnology, Poverty Reduction, and Food Security (May 2001) • D. Kershen (1999) Biotechnology: An essay on the academy, cultural attitudes and public policy, AgBioForum 2(2), 137-146 (Spring 1999) • D. Kershen (2000) The Concept of Natural: Implications for Biotechnology Regulation, AgBioForum 3(1), 321-326 (Winter 2000)

More Related