在技术评估的启发下,对更广泛的转基因生物影响进行结构化分析,为决策提供依据

IF 3.5 2区 社会学 Q1 AGRICULTURE, MULTIDISCIPLINARY
Tim Dassler, Anne I. Myhr, Carina R. Lalyer, Johannes L. Frieß, Armin Spök, Wolfgang Liebert, Kristin Hagen, Margret Engelhard, Bernd Giese
{"title":"在技术评估的启发下,对更广泛的转基因生物影响进行结构化分析,为决策提供依据","authors":"Tim Dassler,&nbsp;Anne I. Myhr,&nbsp;Carina R. Lalyer,&nbsp;Johannes L. Frieß,&nbsp;Armin Spök,&nbsp;Wolfgang Liebert,&nbsp;Kristin Hagen,&nbsp;Margret Engelhard,&nbsp;Bernd Giese","doi":"10.1007/s10460-023-10519-2","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>If genetically modified organisms (GMOs) are approved in the EU for experimental release or marketing authorization (placing on the market), a risk assessment (RA) is carried out beforehand to determine whether this may be associated with negative effects on human health, nature or the environment. Applications are reviewed by the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) and the national Competent Authorities of the Member States. However, the potential ramifications of the GMOs that are systematically addressed in the current RA context are limited. Broader consideration can include environmental and health aspects beyond the scope of the statutory RA, as well as societal, ethical and cultural impacts. These other levels of impact may be considered during the comitology process of authorisation, but how this is done is typically not made explicit in a systematic way. However, with the dynamic developments of new kinds of GMOs, these considerations as well as transparency regarding the role of broader considerations in political decision-making become more and more relevant. Against this backdrop, we identified the requirements and suggest the main elements for such a broader assessment. We use insights from the field of Technology Assessment (TA) to explore the requirements for operationalising a rapid but still systematic, transparent and broad case-by-case GMO assessment compatible with the existing legislative framework.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":7683,"journal":{"name":"Agriculture and Human Values","volume":"41 2","pages":"449 - 458"},"PeriodicalIF":3.5000,"publicationDate":"2023-11-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007/s10460-023-10519-2.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Structured analysis of broader GMO impacts inspired by technology assessment to inform policy decisions\",\"authors\":\"Tim Dassler,&nbsp;Anne I. Myhr,&nbsp;Carina R. Lalyer,&nbsp;Johannes L. Frieß,&nbsp;Armin Spök,&nbsp;Wolfgang Liebert,&nbsp;Kristin Hagen,&nbsp;Margret Engelhard,&nbsp;Bernd Giese\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s10460-023-10519-2\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><p>If genetically modified organisms (GMOs) are approved in the EU for experimental release or marketing authorization (placing on the market), a risk assessment (RA) is carried out beforehand to determine whether this may be associated with negative effects on human health, nature or the environment. Applications are reviewed by the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) and the national Competent Authorities of the Member States. However, the potential ramifications of the GMOs that are systematically addressed in the current RA context are limited. Broader consideration can include environmental and health aspects beyond the scope of the statutory RA, as well as societal, ethical and cultural impacts. These other levels of impact may be considered during the comitology process of authorisation, but how this is done is typically not made explicit in a systematic way. However, with the dynamic developments of new kinds of GMOs, these considerations as well as transparency regarding the role of broader considerations in political decision-making become more and more relevant. Against this backdrop, we identified the requirements and suggest the main elements for such a broader assessment. We use insights from the field of Technology Assessment (TA) to explore the requirements for operationalising a rapid but still systematic, transparent and broad case-by-case GMO assessment compatible with the existing legislative framework.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":7683,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Agriculture and Human Values\",\"volume\":\"41 2\",\"pages\":\"449 - 458\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-11-23\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007/s10460-023-10519-2.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Agriculture and Human Values\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10460-023-10519-2\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"AGRICULTURE, MULTIDISCIPLINARY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Agriculture and Human Values","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10460-023-10519-2","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"AGRICULTURE, MULTIDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

如果欧盟批准转基因生物(GMO)进行试验性释放或上市许可(投放市场),则要事先进行风险评估(RA),以确定是否会对人类健康、自然或环境造成负面影响。申请由欧洲食品安全局(EFSA)和成员国的国家主管当局进行审查。然而,在当前风险评估背景下系统处理的转基因生物的潜在影响是有限的。更广泛的考虑可包括法定风险评估范围之外的环境和健康方面,以及社会、伦理和文化影响。这些其他层面的影响可能会在委员会授权过程中加以考虑,但通常不会以系统的方式加以明确。然而,随着新型转基因生物的蓬勃发展,这些考虑因素以及更广泛的考虑因素在政治决策中的作用的透明度变得越来越重要。在此背景下,我们确定了这种更广泛评估的要求并提出了主要内容。我们利用技术评估(TA)领域的洞察力,探讨了与现有立法框架相适应的快速但仍然系统、透明和广泛的转基因生物个案评估的操作要求。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Structured analysis of broader GMO impacts inspired by technology assessment to inform policy decisions

If genetically modified organisms (GMOs) are approved in the EU for experimental release or marketing authorization (placing on the market), a risk assessment (RA) is carried out beforehand to determine whether this may be associated with negative effects on human health, nature or the environment. Applications are reviewed by the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) and the national Competent Authorities of the Member States. However, the potential ramifications of the GMOs that are systematically addressed in the current RA context are limited. Broader consideration can include environmental and health aspects beyond the scope of the statutory RA, as well as societal, ethical and cultural impacts. These other levels of impact may be considered during the comitology process of authorisation, but how this is done is typically not made explicit in a systematic way. However, with the dynamic developments of new kinds of GMOs, these considerations as well as transparency regarding the role of broader considerations in political decision-making become more and more relevant. Against this backdrop, we identified the requirements and suggest the main elements for such a broader assessment. We use insights from the field of Technology Assessment (TA) to explore the requirements for operationalising a rapid but still systematic, transparent and broad case-by-case GMO assessment compatible with the existing legislative framework.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Agriculture and Human Values
Agriculture and Human Values 农林科学-科学史与科学哲学
CiteScore
6.70
自引率
13.30%
发文量
97
审稿时长
>36 weeks
期刊介绍: Agriculture and Human Values is the journal of the Agriculture, Food, and Human Values Society. The Journal, like the Society, is dedicated to an open and free discussion of the values that shape and the structures that underlie current and alternative visions of food and agricultural systems. To this end the Journal publishes interdisciplinary research that critically examines the values, relationships, conflicts and contradictions within contemporary agricultural and food systems and that addresses the impact of agricultural and food related institutions, policies, and practices on human populations, the environment, democratic governance, and social equity.
×
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