EU Authorization of GMOs—The Failure of Deliberation

M. Weimer
{"title":"EU Authorization of GMOs—The Failure of Deliberation","authors":"M. Weimer","doi":"10.1093/OSO/9780198732792.003.0005","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This chapter examines the extent to which epistemic, political, and diversity challenges arising from the authorization of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) are actually met in practice. It first considers how the European Commission defines the boundaries of its discretionary power as the risk administration of the internal market by contrasting Commission decision-making with two ideal models of administrative legitimation, the control, and the deliberative model. It then looks at two controversial cases of GMO authorization that illustrate the role of the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) in GMO risk assessment, as well as the scientification of the Commission’s risk management and the politicization of comitology decision-making. It also discusses the European Union General Court's responses to the administrative process of GMO authorizations. The chapter shows that top-down decision-making combined with scientification has contributed to the failure of deliberation in GMO risk regulation.","PeriodicalId":322109,"journal":{"name":"Risk Regulation in the Internal Market","volume":"138 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-03-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Risk Regulation in the Internal Market","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/OSO/9780198732792.003.0005","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

This chapter examines the extent to which epistemic, political, and diversity challenges arising from the authorization of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) are actually met in practice. It first considers how the European Commission defines the boundaries of its discretionary power as the risk administration of the internal market by contrasting Commission decision-making with two ideal models of administrative legitimation, the control, and the deliberative model. It then looks at two controversial cases of GMO authorization that illustrate the role of the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) in GMO risk assessment, as well as the scientification of the Commission’s risk management and the politicization of comitology decision-making. It also discusses the European Union General Court's responses to the administrative process of GMO authorizations. The chapter shows that top-down decision-making combined with scientification has contributed to the failure of deliberation in GMO risk regulation.
欧盟批准转基因生物——审议失败
本章考察了在实践中,转基因生物(gmo)授权所带来的认知、政治和多样性挑战在多大程度上得到了满足。本文首先通过将欧盟委员会的决策与行政合法化的两种理想模式——控制模式和审议模式进行对比,探讨欧盟委员会如何界定其自由裁量权作为内部市场风险管理的边界。然后,它着眼于两个有争议的转基因生物授权案例,说明了欧洲食品安全局(EFSA)在转基因生物风险评估中的作用,以及委员会风险管理的科学化和委员会决策的政治化。它还讨论了欧盟普通法院对转基因生物授权行政程序的回应。该章指出,自上而下的决策与科学化相结合是导致转基因生物风险监管审议失败的原因。
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信