Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-c4f8m Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-20T23:36:54.775Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Part I - Risk Analysis Methodology and Decision-Making

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  05 July 2017

Ademola A. Adenle
Affiliation:
Colorado State University
E. Jane Morris
Affiliation:
University of Leeds
Denis J. Murphy
Affiliation:
University of South Wales
Get access
Type
Chapter
Information
Genetically Modified Organisms in Developing Countries
Risk Analysis and Governance
, pp. 11 - 88
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2017

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

References

Abbott, A. (2015). Europe's genetically edited plants stuck in legal limbo. Scientists frustrated at delay in deciding if GM regulations apply to precision gene editing. Nature 528, 319320.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
ACRE (2012). ACRE advice: New techniques used in plant breeding. [Online]. Available from www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/239542/new-techniques-used-in-plant-breeding.pdfGoogle Scholar
Ainsworth, C. (2015). Agriculture: A new breed of edits. Nature 528, S14S15.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Anon, . (2015a). Seeds of change. The European Union faces a fresh battle over next-generation plant-breeding techniques. Nature 520, 131132.Google Scholar
Anon, . (2015b). Crop conundrum. The EU should decide definitively whether gene-edited plants are covered by GM laws. Nature 528, 307308.Google Scholar
Armstead, I. et al. (2009). Bioinformatics in the orphan crops. Briefs in Bioinformatics 10, 645653.Google Scholar
Belhaj, K. et al. (2015). Editing plant genomes with CRISPR/Cas9. Current Opinion in Biotechnology 32, 7684.Google Scholar
Berg, P. (2008). Meetings that changed the world: Asilomar 1975: DNA modification secured. Nature 455, 290291.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bhaya, D. et al. (2011). CRISPR–Cas systems in bacteria and archaea: versatile small RNAs for adaptive defense and regulation. Annual Review of Genetics 45, 273297.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Breyer, D. et al. (2009). Genetic modification through oligonucleotide-mediated mutagenesis. A GMO regulatory challenge? Environmental Biosafety Research 8(2), 5764.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Cernansky, R. (2015). Super vegetables. Nature 522, 146148.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Covshoff, S. and Hibberd, J. M. (2012). Integrating C4 photosynthesis into C3 crops to increase yield potential. Current Opinion in Biotechnology 23, 209214.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Davis, E. (2015). Genome editing: which should I choose, TALEN or CRISPR? Technical note, GeneCopoeia Inc. [Online]. Available from www.genecopoeia.com/resource/genome-editing-talen-or-crispr/Google Scholar
Dawson, I. K. and Jaenicke, H. (2006). Underutilised plant species: the role of biotechnology. Position Paper No. 1. Colombo, Sri Lanka: International Centre for Underutilised Crops.Google Scholar
Dolgin, E. (2015). GM microbes created that can't escape the lab. Engineered bacteria kept in check with a designer diet. Nature 517, 423.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dong, C. et al. (2006). Oligonucleotide-directed gene repair in wheat using a transient plasmid gene repair assay system. Plant Cell Reports 25, 457465.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Edwards, D. and Batley, J. (2010). Plant genome sequencing: applications for crop improvement. Plant Biotechnology Journal 8, 29.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Eklöf, S. (2015). CRISPR/Cas9 mutated Arabidopsis. [Online]. Swedish Board of Agriculture, Jönköping. Available from www.umu.se/digitalAssets/171/171717_backgroud-psbs.pdf and www.upsc.se/documents/Information_on_interpretation_on_CRISPR_Cas9_mutated_plants_Final.pdfGoogle Scholar
Engdahl, W. F. (2007). Seeds of Destruction – The Hidden Agenda of Genetic Manipulation. Montreal: Global Research.Google Scholar
Erbentraut, J. and Shapiro, L. (2015). The genetic revolution could curb world hunger and pesticide use. HuffPost Science 12 December 2015.Google Scholar
EU New Techniques Working Group (2012). Final report. [Online]. Available from www.seemneliit.ee/wp-content/uploads/2011/11/esa_12.0029.pdfGoogle Scholar
FAO, IFAD & WFP (2015). The State of Food Insecurity in the World 2015. Meeting the 2015 International Hunger Targets: Taking Stock of Uneven Progress. Rome: FAO.Google Scholar
Fita, A. et al. (2015). Breeding and domesticating crops adapted to drought and salinity: a new paradigm for increasing food production. Frontiers in Plant Science 6, 978.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Foster, T. M. et al. (2015). Two quantitative trait loci, Dw1 and Dw2, are primarily responsible for rootstock-induced dwarfing in apple. Horticulture Research 2, 15001.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gao, C. et al. (2014). Horizontal gene transfer in plants. Functional and Integrative Genomics 14, 2329.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hsu, P. D. et al. (2014). Development and applications of CRISPR–Cas9 for genome engineering. Cell 157, 12621278.Google Scholar
James, C. (2015). Global status of commercialized Biotech/GM Crops: 2015. ISAAA Brief No. 49. Ithaca, NY: ISAAA. [Online]. Available from http://isaaa.org/resources/publications/briefs/51/executivesummary/default.aspGoogle Scholar
Kowalski, S. P. (2015). Golden Rice, open innovation, and sustainable gobal food security. Industrial Biotechnology 11, 8490.Google Scholar
Kyndt, T. et al. (2015). The genome of cultivated sweet potato contains Agrobacterium T-DNAs with expressed genes: an example of a naturally transgenic food crop. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the USA 112, 58445849.Google Scholar
Laible, G. et al. (2015). Improving livestock for agriculture – technological progress from random transgenesis to precision genome editing heralds a new era. Biotechnology Journal 10, 109120.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ledford, H. (2015). CRISPR, the disruptor. Nature 522, 2024.Google Scholar
Lunshof, J. (2015). Regulate gene editing in wild animals. Nature 521, 127.Google Scholar
Mao, Y. et al. (2013). Application of the CRISPR–Cas system for efficient genome engineering in plants. Molecular Plant 6, 20082011.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Moghissi, A. A. et al. (2016) Golden Rice: scientific, regulatory and public information processes of a genetically modified organism. Critical Reviews in Biotechnology 36(3), 535541.Google ScholarPubMed
Murphy, D. J. (2007). Improved containment strategies in biopharming. Plant Biotechnology Journal 5, 555569.Google Scholar
Murphy, D. J. (2011). Plants, Biotechnology, and Agriculture. Egham: CABI Press.Google Scholar
Murphy, D. J. (2014a). Using modern plant breeding to improve the nutritional and technological qualities of oil crops. Oilseeds & Fats Crops and Lipids 21, D607, DOI: 10.1051/ocl/2014038.Google Scholar
Murphy, D. J. (2014b). The future of oil palm as a major global crop: opportunities and challenges. Journal of Oil Palm Research 26, 124.Google Scholar
Napier, J. A. et al. (2015). Transgenic plants as a sustainable, terrestrial source of fish oils. European Journal of Lipid Science and Technology 117(9), 13171324.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Nyman, M. (2014). New techniques and the GMO-legislation, Swedish Gene Technology Advisory Board, Mistra Biotech Workshop. [Online]. Available from www.genteknik.seGoogle Scholar
Okuzaki, A. and Toriyama, K. (2004). Chimeric RNA/DNA oligonucleotide-directed gene targeting in rice. Plant Cell Reports 22, 509512.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Oye, K. A. et al. (2014). Biotechnology. Regulating gene drives. Science 345(6197), 626628.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Petherick, A. et al. (2015). Genome editing. Nature 528, S1S48.Google Scholar
Ricroch, A. E. and Hénard-Damave, M. C. (2015). Next biotech plants: new traits, crops, developers and technologies for addressing global challenges. Critical Reviews in Biotechnology 36(4), 675690.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Roberts, A. F. et al. (2015). Biosafety research for non-target organism risk assessment of RNAi-based GE plants. Frontiers in Plant Science 6, 958.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Sanchez, P. A. (2015). En route to plentiful food production in Africa. Nature Plants 1, 12.Google Scholar
Soucy, S. M. et al. (2015). Horizontal gene transfer: building the web of life. Nature Reviews Genetics 16, 472482.Google Scholar
Telem, R. S. et al. (2013). Cisgenics – a sustainable approach for crop improvement. Current Genomics 14, 468476.Google Scholar
The Arabidopsis Genome Initiative (2000). Analysis of the genome sequence of the flowering plant Arabidopsis thaliana. Nature 408, 795815.Google Scholar
Vanhercke, T. et al. (2013). Metabolic engineering of plant oils and waxes for use as industrial feedstocks. Plant Biotechnology Journal 11, 196210.Google Scholar
Wang, Y. et al. (2014). Simultaneous editing of three homoeoalleles in hexaploid breadwheat confers heritable resistance to powdery mildew. Nature Biotechnology 32, 947951.Google Scholar
Wolt, J. D. et al. (2016). The regulatory status of genome-edited crops. Plant Biotechnology Journal 14(2), 510518.Google Scholar
Zhang, H. et al. (2014). The CRISPR/Cas9 system produces specific and homozygous targeted gene editing in rice in one generation. Plant Biotechnology Journal 12, 797807.Google Scholar

References

Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (1996). USDA/APHIS Petition 95–352–01P for the Determination of Nonregulated Status for CZW-3 Squash. [Online]. Available from www.aphis.usda.gov/brs/aphisdocs2/95_35201p_com.pdfGoogle Scholar
Convention on Biological Diversity (2000). Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety to the Convention on Biological Diversity. Text and Annexes. [Online]. Available from www.cbd.int/doc/legal/cartagena-protocol-en.pdfGoogle Scholar
Craig, W. et al. (2008). An overview of general features of risk assessment of genetically modified crops. Euphytica 164, 853880.Google Scholar
EFSA (2010). Guidance on the environmental risk assessment of genetically modified plants. EFSA Panel on Genetically Modified Organisms (GMO), European Food Safety Authority (EFSA), Parma, Italy. EFSA Journal 8(11), 18791990.Google Scholar
EPA (1998). Guidelines for Ecological Risk Assessment. EPA/630/R-95/002F. Federal Register 63(93), 2684626924.Google Scholar
Fitzpatrick, J. et al. (2009). Problem formulation in environmental risk assessment of genetically modified crops: a Brazilian workshop. BioAssay 4, 5.Google Scholar
García-Alonso, M. (2013). Safety assessment of food and feed derived from GM crops: using problem formulation to ensure ‘fit for purpose’ risk assessment. Collection of Biosafety Reviews 8, 72101.Google Scholar
Gray, A. (2012). Problem formulation in environmental risk assessment for genetically modified crops: a practitioner's approach. Collection of Biosafety Reviews 6, 1465.Google Scholar
Halpin, C. (2005). Gene stacking in transgenic plants – the challenge for 21st century plant biotechnology. Plant Biotechnology Journal 3, 141155.Google Scholar
Herman, R. A. et al. (2013). Bringing policy relevance and scientific discipline to environmental risk assessment for genetically modified crops. Trends in Biotechnology 31, 493496.Google Scholar
James, C. (2012). Global Status of Commercialized Transgenic Crops. [Online]. Available from www.isaaa.org/resources/publications/briefs/44/executivesummary/default.aspGoogle Scholar
James, C. (2014). Global Status of Commercialized Transgenic Crops. [Online]. Available from www.isaaa.org/resources/publications/briefs/49/executivesummary/pdf/B49-ExecSum-English.pdfGoogle Scholar
Johnson, K. L. et al. (2007). How does scientific risk assessment of GM crops fit within the wider risk analysis? Trends in Plant Science 12, 15.Google Scholar
Julié-Galau, S. et al. (2014). Evaluation of the potential for interspecific hybridization between Camelina sativa and related wild Brassicaceae in anticipation of field trials of GM camelina. Transgenic Research 23, 6774.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Naqvi, S. et al. (2009). When more is better: multigene engineering in plants. Trends in Plant Science 15, 4856.Google Scholar
Office of the Gene Technology Regulator (2005). Risk Analysis Framework 2005. [Online]. Available from www.ogtr.gov.au/internet/ogtr/publishing.nsf/content/raf-3/$FILE/raffinal2.2.pdfGoogle Scholar
Office of the Gene Technology Regulator (2013). Risk Analysis Framework 2013. [Online]. Available from www.ogtr.gov.au/internet/ogtr/publishing.nsf/content/raffinal5-tocGoogle Scholar
Que, Q. et al. (2010). Trait stacking in transgenic plants – challenges and opportunities. GM Crops 1(4), 220229.Google Scholar
Rajan, R. S. and Letourneau, D. K. (2012). What risk assessments of genetically modified organisms can learn from institutional analyses of public health risks. Journal of Biomedicine and Biotechnology 203093, 8 pages, doi:10.1155/2012/203093.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Raybould, A. (2007). Ecological versus ecotoxicological methods for assessing the environmental risks of transgenic crops. Plant Science 173, 589602.Google Scholar
Stein, A. J. and Rodriguez-Cerezo, E. (2009). The global pipeline of new GM crops: implications of asynchronous approval for international trade. [Online]. Available from http://ipts.jrc.ec.europa.eu/publications/pub.cfm?id=2420Google Scholar
Tepfer, M. et al. (2013). Putting problem formulation at the forefront of GMO risk analysis. GM Crops & Food 4, 1015.Google Scholar
Tepfer, M. et al. (2015). A critical evaluation of whether recombination in virus-resistant transgenic plants will lead to the emergence of novel viral diseases. New Phytologist 207, 536541.Google Scholar
Tepfer, M. and García-Arenal, F. (2015). Does recombination in virus-resistant transgenic plants lead to emergence of novel viral diseases? ISB News Report, June.Google Scholar
Wolt, J. D. et al. (2010). Problem formulation in the environmental risk assessment for genetically modified plants. Transgenic Research 19(3), 425436.Google Scholar

References

Arvidsson, G. (2015). Food security now or wait for research to assess risks? Genetically modified crops and smallholder farmers in Africa. Nordiska Afrikainstitutet Policy Note 3.Google Scholar
Brookes, G. and Barfoot, P. (2016). GM Crops: Global Socio-economic and Environmental Impacts 1996–2014. Dorchester: PG Economics Ltd.Google Scholar
Burachik, M. (2010). Experience from use of GMOs in Argentinian agriculture, economy and environment. New Biotechnology 27(5), 588592.Google Scholar
CAC (2007). Working principles for risk analysis for food safety for application by governments. CAC/GL 62–2007.Google Scholar
Convention on Biological Diversity (2000). Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety to the Convention on Biological Diversity. Text and Annexes. [Online]. Available from www.cbd.int/doc/legal/cartagena-protocol-en.pdfGoogle Scholar
Convention on Biological Diversity (2012). Guidance on risk assessment of living modified organisms. UNEP/CBD/BS/COP-MOP/6/13/Add.1. [Online]. Available from www.cbd.int/doc/meetings/bs/mop-06/official/mop-06-13-add1-en.pdfGoogle Scholar
Convention on Biological Diversity (2015). Guidance on risk assessment of living modified organisms and monitoring in the context of risk assessment. UNEP/CBD/BS/RARM/AHTEG/2015/1/4. [Online]. Available from www.cbd.int/doc/meetings/bs/bsrarm-ahteg-2015-01/official/bsrarm-ahteg-2015-01-04-en.pdfGoogle Scholar
European Food Safety Authority (2006). Guidance document of the scientific panel on genetically modified organisms for the risk assessment of genetically modified plants and derived food and feed. EFSA Journal 99, 1100.Google Scholar
Falck-Zepeda, J. et al. (2013). The current status of the debate on socio-economic regulatory assessments: positions and policies in Canada, the USA, the EU and developing countries. World Review of Science, Technology and Sustainable Development 10(4), 203207.Google Scholar
FAO/WHO (1998). The application of risk communication to food standards and safety matters. [Online]. Available from www.fao.org/docrep/005/x1271e/X1271E01.htmGoogle Scholar
Fischer, K. et al. (2015). Social impacts of GM crops in agriculture: a systematic literature review. Sustainability 7(7), 85988620.Google Scholar
FoodRisC (2015). Website of the project ‘Perceptions and communication of food risk/benefits across Europe’. [Online]. Available from www.foodrisc.orgGoogle Scholar
Frewer, L. J. et al. (1998). Consumer acceptance of transgenic crops. Pesticide Science 52, 388393.Google Scholar
Herman, R. A. et al. (2013). Bringing policy relevance and scientific discipline to environmental risk assessment for genetically modified crops. Trends in Biotechnology 31(9), 493496.Google Scholar
IRRI (undated). What is the status of the Golden Rice project coordinated by IRRI? [Online]. Available from http://irri.org/golden-rice/faqs/what-is-the-status-of-the-golden-rice-project-coordinated-by-irriGoogle Scholar
Kamanga, G. D. et al. (2014). Why communication and issues management (CIMS) must occupy a central role in GM projects: case study of the Africa Biofortified Sorghum (ABS) Project. In Biotechnology in Africa: Emergence, Initiatives and Future, ed. Wambugu, F. and Kamanga, D.. Basel: Springer International Publishing Switzerland, pp. 225241.Google Scholar
Ludlow, K. et al. (2013). Socio-economic Considerations in Biotechnology Regulation. Berlin: Springer Science and Business Media.Google Scholar
Marcoux, J.-M. et al. (2013). The inclusion of nonsafety criteria within the regulatory framework of agricultural biotechnology: exploring factors that are likely to influence policy transfer. Review of Policy Research 36(6), 657684.Google Scholar
Mitre, M. and Reis, B. P. W. (2015). Science and politics in the regulation of genetically modified organisms in Brazil. Review of Policy Research 31(2), 125147.Google Scholar
Morris, E. J. (1995). Biosafety regulations in South Africa. African Crop Science Journal 3(3), 303307.Google Scholar
Morris, E. J. (2011). A semi-quantitative approach to GMO risk–benefit analysis. Transgenic Research 20(5), 10551061.Google Scholar
Morris, E. J. and Thomson, J. A. (2014). Genetically modified crops commercialized in South Africa. In Biotechnology in Africa: Emergence, Initiatives and Future, ed. Wambugu, F. and Kamanga, D.. Basel: Springer International Publishing Switzerland, pp. 5365.Google Scholar
Racovita, M. et al. (2013). Experiences in sub-Saharan Africa with GM crop risk communication. GM Crops & Food 4(1), 1927.Google Scholar
Ramatha, L. and Andrew, J. (2012). Socio-economic aspects in decision-making in the context of the Biosafety Protocol: Malaysia's experience and case studies. Asian Biotechnology and Development Review 14(3), 1930.Google Scholar
Sayre, R. et al. (2011). The BioCassava Plus program: biofortification of cassava for sub-Saharan Africa. Annual Reviews of Plant Biology 62, 251272.Google Scholar
Siegrist, M. et al. (2016). Biased perception about gene technology: how perceived naturalness and affect distort benefit perception. Appetite 96, 509516.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Stein, A. J. et al. (2008). Genetic engineering for the poor: golden rice and public health in India. World Development 36(1), 144158.Google Scholar
The Montpellier Panel (2013). Sustainable Intensification: A New Paradigm for African Agriculture, London.Google Scholar
USDA (2015). Malaysia Agricultural Biotechnology Annual 2015. Global Agricultural Information Network (GAIN) Report Number MY5011. [Online]. Available from http://gain.fas.usda.gov/Recent%20GAIN%20Publications/Agricultural%20Biotechnology%20Annual_Kuala%20Lumpur_Malaysia_7-10-2015.pdfGoogle Scholar
Vigani, M. and Olper, A. (2013). GMO standards, endogenous policy and the market for information. Food Policy 43, 3243.Google Scholar
Vigani, M. and Olper, A. (2015). Patterns and determinants of GMO regulations: an overview of recent evidence. AgBioForum 18(1), 4454.Google Scholar
Wesseler, J. and Zilberman, D. (2014). The economic power of the Golden Rice opposition. Environment and Development Economics 19(6), 724742.Google Scholar
Wolt, J. D. et al. (2016). The regulatory status of genome-edited crops. Plant Biotechnology Journal 14(2), 510518.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

References

CFIA (2016). Canadian Food Inspection Agency Biology Documents. [Online]. Available from www.inspection.gc.ca/english/plaveg/bio/dir/biodoce.shtmlGoogle Scholar
Crawley, J. et al. (2001). Transgenic crops in natural habitats. Nature 409, 682683.Google Scholar
García-Alonso, M. et al. (2014). Transportability of confined field trial data for environmental risk assessment of genetically engineered plants: a conceptual framework. Transgenic Research 23, 10251041.Google Scholar
Layton, R. et al. (2015). Building better environmental risk assessments. Frontiers in Bioengineering and Biotechnology 3, 110. http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fbioe.2015.00110Google Scholar
Mercer, K. L. et al. (2006). Effects of completion on the fitness of wild and crop-wild hybrid sunflower from a diversity of wild populations and crop lines. Evolution 60(10), 20442055.Google Scholar
NAS (1987). Introduction of Recombinant DNA Engineered Organisms into the Environment: Key Issues. Washington, D.C.: National Academy Press.Google Scholar
Saurabh, S. et al. (2014). RNA interference: concept to reality in crop improvement. Planta 239(3), 543564.Google Scholar
Schnell, J. et al. (2015). A comparative analysis of insertional effects in genetically engineered plants: considerations for pre-market assessments. Transgenic Research 24, 117.Google Scholar
Smyth, S. J. et al. (2011). Environmental impacts from herbicide tolerant canola production in Western Canada. Agricultural Systems 104(5), 403410.Google Scholar
Union of Concerned Scientists (2013). ‘Superweeds’ resulting from Monsanto's products overrun U.S. farm landscape. [Online]. Available from www.ucsusa.org/news/press_release/superweeds-overrun-farmlands-0384.html#.WG0fmX1BkbUGoogle Scholar
Wozniak, C. and McHughen, A. (2012). Regulation of Agricultural Biotechnology: The United States and Canada. Berlin: Springer Science and Business Media.Google Scholar

References

Adenle, A. A. et al. (2013). Status of development, regulation and adoption of GM agriculture in Africa: views and positions of stakeholder groups. Food Policy 43, 159166.Google Scholar
African Union (2014). African Union Model Law on Biosafety, Art. 14: Identification and Labelling. Addis Ababa: African Union Commission, Department of Human Resources, Science and Technology.Google Scholar
Bansal, S. and Gruère, G. P. (2012). Implication of mandatory labelling of GM food in India. Evidence from the supply side. Food Policy 37(4), 467472.Google Scholar
Bansal, S. and Gruère, G. P. (2015). Labelling GM food in India: anticipating the effects of GM-brinjal and rice marketing chains. AgBioForum 18(2), 156167.Google Scholar
Bouet, A. et al. (2010). From ‘may contain’ to ‘does contain’: the price and trade effects of strict information requirements for GM maize under the Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety. Selected paper prepared for presentation at the Agricultural & Applied Economics Association's 2010 AAEA, CAES & WAEA Joint Annual Meeting, 25–27 July, Denver, Colorado.Google Scholar
Branquinho, M. R. et al. (2010). Survey of compliance with labelling legislation in food containing GMOs in Brazil. Journal of Food Composition and Analysis 23(3), 220225.Google Scholar
Carter, C. A. and Gruère, G. P. (2003). Mandatory labelling of genetically modified foods: does it really provide consumer choice? AgBioForum 6(1&2), 6870.Google Scholar
Carter, C. A. et al. (2012). California's Proposition 37: effects of mandatory labeling of GM food. ARE Update 15(6), 38 (University of California Giannini Foundation of Agricultural Economics).Google Scholar
CAC (2011). Codex Alimentarius Commission compilation of Codex texts relevant to labelling of foods derived from modern biotechnology, CAC/GL 76–2011. [Online]. Available from www.codexalimentarius.org/standards/list-of-standards/en/Google Scholar
Chimhundu, H. (2002). Language Policies in Africa. Final report of the Intergovernmental Conference on Language Policies in Africa, revised version. UNESCO.Google Scholar
Convention on Biological Diversity (2000). Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety to the Convention on Biological Diversity. Text and Annexes. [Online]. Available from www.cbd.int/doc/legal/cartagena-protocol-en.pdfGoogle Scholar
De Leon, A. et al. (2004). The cost implications of GM food labelling in the Philippines. Crop Biotech Brief 4, 2. [Online]. Available from www.isaaa.org/kc/Publications/pdfs/briefs/Brief4-2.pdfGoogle Scholar
Dubock, A. (2014). The politics of Golden Rice. GM Crops & Food 5(3), 210222.Google Scholar
EC-JRC (2015). New guidelines to enhance GMO testing across the European Union. [Online]. Available from https://ec.europa.eu/jrc/en/news/new-guidelines-gmo-testing?searchGoogle Scholar
Falck-Zepeda, J. B. (2006). Coexistence, genetically modified biotechnologies and biosafety: implication for developing countries. American Journal of Agriculture Economics 88(5), 12001208.Google Scholar
Gallani, B. (2015). Labelling of genetically modified (GM) ingredients in foods and beverages. In Advances in Food and Beverages Labelling: Information and Regulations, ed. Berryman, P.. Amsterdam: Elsevier, pp. 177189.Google Scholar
Glowka, L. (2003). Law and Modern Biotechnology: Selected Issues of Relevance to Food and Agriculture. Rome: Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, p. 44.Google Scholar
GMO-Compass (2007). Labelling of foodstuffs produced from animals – the discussion continues. [Online]. Available from www.gmo-compass.org/eng/news/stories/286.gmo_labelling_animal_products_discussion_continues.htmlGoogle Scholar
Gruère, G. P. et al. (2009). Explaining international differences in genetically modified food labelling policies. Review of International Economics 17(3), 393408.Google Scholar
Gruère, G. P. and Rao, S. R. (2007). A review of international labelling policies of genetically modified food to evaluate India's proposed rule. AgBioForum 10(1), 5164.Google Scholar
Huffman, W. E. and McCluskey, J. J. (2014). The economics of labelling of GM foods. AgBioForum 17(2), 156160.Google Scholar
Jaftha, J. (2014). Guidelines on the role and functions of a biosafety committee (NBC) within a regulatory system – a case study from South Africa. In Biosafety in Africa: Experiences and Best Practices, ed. Keetch, D. P. et al. East Lansing, MI: Michigan State University Press.Google Scholar
Jansen van Rijssen, F. W. et al. (2015). The precautionary principle: making managerial decisions on GMOs is difficult. South African Journal of Science 111(3, 4), 19.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kenya (2012). The Biosafety Act (No. 2 of 2009), The Biosafety (Labelling) Regulations, 2012, Arrangements of Legislation, Legal Notice No. 40. [Online]. Available from www.biosafetykenya.go.ke/Docs/labelling.pdfGoogle Scholar
Kimani, V. and Gruère, G. (2010). Implication of import regulations and information requirements under the Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety for GM commodities in Kenya. AgBioForum 13(3), 222241.Google Scholar
Mann, S. (2015). Is ‘GMO free’ an additional ‘organic’? On the economics of chain segregation. AgBioForum 18(1), 2633.Google Scholar
Miller, H. I. and Kershen, D. I. (2011). A label we don't need. Nature Biotechnology 29(11), 971972.Google Scholar
Morris, E. J. (2014). Biosafety regulatory systems in Africa. In Biosafety in Africa: Experiences and Best Practices, ed. Keetch, D. P. et al. East Lansing, MI: Michigan State University.Google Scholar
Namibia (2006). Biosafety Act (No. 7 of 2006), Government notice no. 3736.Google Scholar
OECD (1992). OECD Principles on Good Laboratory Practice, revised. [Online]. Available from www.oecd.org/chemicalsafety/testing/goodlaboratorypracticeglp.htmGoogle Scholar
Oh, J. and Ezezika, O. C. (2014). To label or not to label: balancing the risks, benefits and costs of mandatory labelling of GM food in Africa. Agricultural and Food Security 3(8), 18.Google Scholar
Petrillo, M. et al. (2015). JRC GMO-Amplicons: a collection of nucleic acid sequences related to genetically modified organisms. [Online]. Available from www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4589694/Google Scholar
Plastina, A. and Giannakas, K. (2007). Market and welfare effects of GMO introduction in small open economies. AgBioForum 10(2), 104123.Google Scholar
South Africa (2004). Foodstuffs, Cosmetics and Disinfectants Act (Act No. 54 of 1972). Regulations relating to labelling of foodstuffs obtained through certain techniques of genetic modification, Government Gazette No. 25,908, 16 January 2004.Google Scholar
South Africa (2011). Consumer Protection Act (Act No. 68 of 2008). Government Gazette 32186 (2009); 526; Regulations (R293, 1 April 2011), Government Gazette 34180 (2011); 550. [Online]. Available from www.thedti.gov.za/business_regulation/acts/consumer_protection.PDFGoogle Scholar
Trapman, S. M. et al. (2009). Guidance document on measurement uncertainty for GMO testing laboratories. European Commission Joint Research Centre. [Online]. Available from http://publications.jrc.ec.europa.eu/repository/bitstream/JRC50052/101-2009_as%20published.pdfGoogle Scholar
UN (2003). United Nations Guidelines on Consumer Protection, Department of Economic and Social Affairs. [Online]. Available from http://unctad.org/en/PublicationsLibrary/UN-DESA_GCP1999_en.pdfGoogle Scholar
UNCTAD (2013). United Nations Conference on Trade and Development, United Nations Guidelines on Consumer Protection. [Online]. Available from http://unctad.org/en/Pages/DITC/CompetitionLaw/UN-Guidelines-on-Consumer-Protection.aspxGoogle Scholar
Varacca, A. et al. (2014). Economic aspects of segregation between GM and non-GM crops in Italy. AgBioForum 17(2), 123132.Google Scholar
WTO (1995a). World Trade Organization, Uruguay Round Agreement: Agreement on the Application of Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures. [Online]. Available from www.wto.org/english/docs_e/legal_e/15sps_01_e.htmGoogle Scholar
WTO (1995b). World Trade Organization, Uruguay Round Agreement: Agreement on the Application of Technical Barriers to Trade. [Online]. Available from www.wto.org/english/docs_e/legal_e/17-tbt_e.htmGoogle Scholar
WTO (2011). The WTO and the FAO/WHO Codex Alimentarius. [Online]. Available from www.wto.org/english/thewto_e/coher_e/wto_codex_e.htmGoogle Scholar

References

Brookes, G. and Barfoot, P. (2014). Economic impact of GM crops: The global income and production effects 1996–2012. GM Crops & Food 5(1), 6575.Google Scholar
CBD (2010). Assessment and Review under Article 35 of the Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety: Discussion Paper on a Proposed Framework for the Second Assessment and Review. Report UNEP/CBD/BS/COP-MOP/5/15, 22 January 2010.Google Scholar
CBD (2013). Framework and Action Plan for Capacity-Building for the Effective Implementation of the Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety (2012–2020).Google Scholar
Falck-Zepeda, J. et al., eds. (2013). Genetically Modified Crops in Africa: Economic and Policy Lessons from Countries South of the Sahara. Washington, D.C.: International Food Policy Research Institute.Google Scholar
Johnston, S. et al. (2008). Internationally Funded Training in Biotechnology and Biosafety: Is It Bridging the Biotech Divide? Yokohama: UNU Institute of Advanced Studies.Google Scholar
Kitabu, G. (2014). Here comes drought-tolerant hybrid maize varieties. The Guardian, 17 January 2014. [Online]. Available from http://wema.aatf-africa.org/files/guardian-oikeh-interview.pdfGoogle Scholar
Klümper, W. and Qaim, M. (2014). A meta-analysis of the impacts of genetically modified crops. PLoS ONE 9(11), e111629.Google Scholar
Maredia, K. et al. (2011). Capacity building in biosafety. In Environmental Safety of Genetically Engineered Crops, ed. Grumet, R. et al. East Lansing, MI: Michigan State University Press.Google Scholar
McLean, M. A. et al. (2002). A Conceptual Framework for Implementing Biosafety: Linking Policy, Capacity, and Regulation. Briefing Paper No. 47. The Hague: International Service for National Agricultural Research.Google Scholar
Pertry, I. et al. (2014). Biosafety capacity building: experiences and challenges from a distance learning approach. New Biotechnology 31(1), 6468.Google Scholar
UNEP (2006). A Comparative Analysis of Experiences and Lessons from the UNEP-GEF Biosafety Projects. Geneva: UNEP-GEF Biosafety Unit.Google Scholar
UNEP (2008). Guidance towards Implementation of National Biosafety Frameworks: Lessons Learned from the UNEP Demonstration Projects. Geneva: UNEP-GEF Biosafety Unit.Google Scholar

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure coreplatform@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×