Analysing NGOs and their Discourses against GM Crops: Germany and the UK

Ksenia Gerasimova
{"title":"Analysing NGOs and their Discourses against GM Crops: Germany and the UK","authors":"Ksenia Gerasimova","doi":"10.5771/9783845296432-259","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The UK and Germany are both currently regulated by the EU directives on GMOs, but this may change as the UK’s exit from the European Union (Brexit) progresses over the next two years. Thus, it is an interesting time to provide a comparative study of these two countries and to examine the difference in national contexts, which leads to a wider debate on the role of science, and public trust in scientific research and its impact on policymaking. Both countries apply the Precautionary Principle. They are both also home to the offices of anti-GMO Nongovernmental Organizations (NGOs) – Greenpeace, Friends of the Earth, and Danube Soya – which belong to the same European network, GMO-Free Europe, and compare their ideas and campaigns on GM crops. It appears that Britain has adopted a softer version of the Precautionary Principle and is less tolerant of ‘alternative science’ , which may allow more opportunities to introduce new biotechnology, particularly genome editing, in the immediate future.","PeriodicalId":360084,"journal":{"name":"Genome Editing in Agriculture","volume":"23 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1900-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Genome Editing in Agriculture","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5771/9783845296432-259","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The UK and Germany are both currently regulated by the EU directives on GMOs, but this may change as the UK’s exit from the European Union (Brexit) progresses over the next two years. Thus, it is an interesting time to provide a comparative study of these two countries and to examine the difference in national contexts, which leads to a wider debate on the role of science, and public trust in scientific research and its impact on policymaking. Both countries apply the Precautionary Principle. They are both also home to the offices of anti-GMO Nongovernmental Organizations (NGOs) – Greenpeace, Friends of the Earth, and Danube Soya – which belong to the same European network, GMO-Free Europe, and compare their ideas and campaigns on GM crops. It appears that Britain has adopted a softer version of the Precautionary Principle and is less tolerant of ‘alternative science’ , which may allow more opportunities to introduce new biotechnology, particularly genome editing, in the immediate future.
分析非政府组织及其反对转基因作物的言论:德国和英国
英国和德国目前都受欧盟关于转基因生物的指令监管,但随着英国在未来两年内退出欧盟(Brexit)的进程,这种情况可能会发生变化。因此,现在是一个对这两个国家进行比较研究并检查国家背景差异的有趣时机,这将导致关于科学作用、公众对科学研究的信任及其对政策制定的影响的更广泛辩论。两国都适用预防原则。它们也是反转基因非政府组织(ngo)——绿色和平组织、地球之友和多瑙河大豆——办公室的所在地,它们属于同一个欧洲网络“无转基因欧洲”,它们比较了它们关于转基因作物的想法和运动。英国似乎采取了一种较为温和的预防原则,对“替代科学”的容忍度较低,这可能会在不久的将来为引入新的生物技术,特别是基因组编辑提供更多机会。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信