Suchergebnisse

"The books on "Safety Assessment of Transgenic Organisms" constitute a compilation of the OECD Biosafety Consensus Documents. When published, Volume 1 and 2 contained the documents issued before 2006, Volume 3 and 4 are a continuation of the compilation up to 2010. The OECD Biosafety Consensus Documents identify elements of scientific information used in the environmental safety and risk assessment of transgenic organisms which are common to OECD member countries and some non members associated with the work. This is intended to encourage information sharing, promote harmonised practices, and prevent duplication of effort among countries. These books offer ready access to those consensus documents which have been issued on the website thus far. As such, it should be of value to applicants for commercial uses of transgenic organisms (crops, trees, microorganisms), to regulators and risk assessors in national authorities, as well as the wider scientific community. More information on the OECD´s work related to the biosafety of transgenic organisms is found at BioTrack Online (http://www.oecd.org/biotrack). "

"The books on "Safety Assessment of Transgenic Organisms" constitute a compilation of the OECD Biosafety Consensus Documents. When published, Volume 1 and 2 contained the documents issued before 2006, Volume 3 and 4 are a continuation of the compilation up to 2010. The OECD Biosafety Consensus Documents identify elements of scientific information used in the environmental safety and risk assessment of transgenic organisms which are common to OECD member countries and some non members associated with the work. This is intended to encourage information sharing, promote harmonised practices, and prevent duplication of effort among countries. These books offer ready access to those consensus documents which have been issued on the website thus far. As such, it should be of value to applicants for commercial uses of transgenic organisms (crops, trees, microorganisms), to regulators and risk assessors in national authorities, as well as the wider scientific community. More information on the OECD´s work related to the biosafety of transgenic organisms is found at BioTrack Online (http://www.oecd.org/biotrack). "

Industry and mainstream research and policy institutions often suggest that transgenic crop varieties can raise the productivity of poor third world farmers, feed the hungry, and reduce poverty. These claims are critically evaluated by examining global-hunger data, the constraints that affect the productivity of small farmers in the third world, and the factors that explain their poverty. No significant role is found for crop genetics in determining hunger, productivity, or poverty, casting doubt on the ability of new transgenic crop varieties produced by genetic engineering to address these problems. An examination of the special risks these varieties pose for poor farmers in the complex, diverse, and risk-prone environments that characterize peasant agriculture on a global scale suggests that transgenic crop varieties are likely to be more of hindrance than a help to the advancement of poor farmers.

The rapidity of change has left scant opportunity for investigation of the consequences of adoption of transgenic crops on long-term ecosystem or economic system functioning. Economic theory suggests that, if the "Biotechnology Revolution" is left to market forces alone, there will be neglected public goods. Theory and limited empirical evidence suggests that there are significant incentives for private firms to discount and neglect certain environmental impacts and to develop products that meet mainly the needs of those able and willing to pay. Negative distributional impacts on rural societies and economies will not normally enter the private calculus nor will the long-term problems of insect and plant resistance. Thus, there is a strong case for enhanced public roles with respect to the use of transgenic crops. The adoption of the precautionary approach in public policies addressing transgenic crops is one alternative to better reflect public concerns.

The Philippines is the first Asian country to establish a biosafety regulatory system in 1990 and to commercialize a genetically modified (GM) food crop (Bt corn) in 2003. After ten years, GM corn (insect-protected or Bt, herbicide tolerant or HT and stacked with both traits) is planted to more than 800,000 ha. However, the success that GM corn enjoys in the country has not yet been transferred to the home-grown GM or transgenic crops. Presently, four GM crops: Bt cotton, Bt eggplant, Golden Rice and long shelf-life papaya are being field tested in The Philippines. Among the challenges confronting the conduct of R&D and commercialization of these transgenic crops are as follows: (a) access to technology and/or lack of know-how; (b) funding constraints; (c) strict regulation; and (d) acceptance and activism. We have addressed these challenges in various ways. Lack of technology and know-how is addressed by technology acquisition as well as extensive training of personnel. Funds for projects come from government agencies (Philippines' Department of Science and Technology and the Department of Agriculture) and international funding agencies. Modern biotech products are regulated under the National Committee on Biosafety of the Philippines (EO 490) of 1990 and the National Biosafety Framework (EO 514) of 2006 and regulation is widely perceived by researchers as strict and very slow. However, it is also the strict and science-based regulation, which has allowed the commercialization of Bt corn. Lastly, similar to the experience in other countries, strong and persistent anti-biotech groups exist in The Philippines. To address this, continuous dissemination of science-based information is undertaken by both public and private agencies for better understanding and appreciation of modern biotechnology by the general public and all concerned sectors.

This report summarises a participatory technology assessment on transgenic herbicide-resistant crops organised by the Research Unit, Standard Setting and the Environment, at the Wissenschaftszentrum Berlin, between 1991 and 1993. The technology assessment was a round table involving some fifty representatives from industry, environmental groups, regulatory agencies and science in more than ten days of controversial debate and analysis. The first part of this summary report describes the methodology used applied in analysing the deliberations of the technology assessment; the second part presents the empirical findings with respect to the performance, the risks and the benefits of transgenic herbicide-resistant crops; the third part gives an account of the ethical, legal and political discussions held in the technology assessment, as well as the recommendations for regulation advanced by the participants. ; Dieser Bericht ist die Zusammenfassung eines partizipativen Verfahrens zur Technikfolgenabschätzung von Kulturpflanzen mit gentechnisch erzeugter Herbizidresistenz, das von der Abteilung Normbildung und Umwelt am Wissenschaftszentrum Berlin organisiert worden war. Das Verfahren hat von 1991 bis 1993 etwa fünfzig Vertreter der Industrie, der Umweltgruppen, der zuständigen Behörden und der Wissenschaft an einem Runden Tisch versammelt, an dem die Beteiligten insgesamt fast zehn Tage kontrovers miteinander diskutiert haben. Im ersten Teil dieser Zusammenfassung wird das partizipative Verfahren beschrieben und erläutert, wie aus den Diskussionen zwischen den Beteiligten Ergebnisse für die Technikfolgenabschätzung abgeleitet wurden. Der zweite Teil enthält die empirischen Befunde zu den möglichen Risiken und zum erwartbaren Nutzen transgener herbizid-resistenter Kulturpflanzen. Der dritte Teil stellt die ethischen, rechtlichen und politischen Diskussionen dar, die zwischen den Beteiligten geführt wurden; er enthält außerdem die Empfehlungen des Verfahrens zur Regulierung herbizid-resistenter Pflanzen.