Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Refining the Risk Analysis Framework

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Biotechnology Regulation and Trade

Part of the book series: Natural Resource Management and Policy ((NRMP,volume 51))

  • 273 Accesses

Abstract

This chapter investigates the changing methods of risk assessment for agricultural products and notes a deterioration in the likelihood that risk assessment exercises will be completed successfully. Genetically modified products are used as an example. The changing nature of risk assessments is found to be inhibiting international market access, reducing trade and, hence, making investments in productivity enhancing technologies in agriculture less financially attractive. This changing dynamic of risk assessment has negative impacts on food security.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 99.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 129.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 129.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  • Alston, J.M. 2002. Spillovers. The Australian Journal of Agricultural Economics 46: 315–346.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Alston, J.M. 2010. The benefits from agricultural research and development, innovation, and productivity growth. OECD food, agriculture and fisheries papers, no. 31. Paris: OECD Publishing. http://dx.doi.org/10.1787/5km91nfsnkwg-en.

  • Alston, J.M., J.M. Beddow, and P.G. Pardey. 2009. Agricultural research, productivity and food prices in the long run. Science 325: 1009–1010.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ansong, A. 2013. Creating WTO law by stealth: GSP conditionalities and the EC—Tariff preferences case. The Estey Centre Journal of International Law and Trade Policy 14 (2): 133–144.

    Google Scholar 

  • BASF. 2010. News release: European Commission approves Amflora starch potato. Online at: http://www.potatopro.com/news/2010/european-commission-approves-amflora-starch-potato.

  • BASF. 2012. News release: BASF to concentrate plant biotechnology activities on main market in North and South America. Online at: http://www.basf.com/group/pressrelease/P-12-109.

  • Beddington, J. 2010. Food security: Contributions from science to a new and greener revolution. Philosophical Transactions of The Royal Society B Biological Sciences 365 (1537): 61–71.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cardwell, R., and W.A. Kerr. 2008. Protecting biotechnology IPRs in developing countries: Simple analytics of a levy solution. Journal of Agricultural Economics 59 (2): 217–236.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • COCERAL. 2010. Low level presence of GMOs not authorized in Europe: The linseed CDC triffid case, committee of cereals, oilseeds, animal feed, oils and fats, olive oil and agrosupply, Brussels, trade file on copy with authors.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cressey, D. 2013. Monsanto drops GM in Europe. Nature 499 (7459): 387.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Davies, A.R. 2013. Food futures: Co-designing sustainable eating practices for 2050. EuroChoices 12 (2): 4–10.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dayananda, B. 2011. The European Union policy of zero tolerance: Insights from the discovery of CDC triffid. Unpublished M.Sc. thesis, University of Saskatchewan, Saskatoon.

    Google Scholar 

  • Endres, A.B., and N. Johnson. 2011. $750 million settlement in GM rice contamination. Available at: http://www.farmdocdaily.illinois.edu/2011/07/750_million_settlement_in_gm_r.html.

  • EuropaBio. 2006. Herculex I (1507) Maize: Safety and general characteristics. Available at: http://www.europabio.org/sites/default/files/pages/1507_factsheet.pdf.

  • European Parliament. 2001. Directive 2001/18/EC of the European Parliament and of the council of 12 March 2001 on the deliberate release into the environment of genetically modified organisms and repealing Council Directive 90/220/EEC. Available at: http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:L:2001:106:0001:0038:EN:PDF.

  • Evans, A. 2009. The feeding of the nine billion: Global food security. London: Chatham House.

    Google Scholar 

  • Food and Agriculture Organization. 2006. The state of food insecurity in the world: 2006. Online at: http://www.fao.org/docrep/009/a0750e/a0750e00.htm.

  • Furtan, W.H., R.S. Gray, and J.J. Holzman. 2005. Regulatory approval decisions in the presence of market externalities: The case of genetically modified wheat. Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics 30 (1): 12–27.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gaisford, J.D., J.E. Hobbs, W.A. Kerr, N. Perdikis, and M.D. Plunkett. 2001. The economics of biotechnology. Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar Publishing Ltd.

    Google Scholar 

  • Haggui, F., P.W.B. Phillips, and R. Gray. 2006. Opposition to genetically modified wheat and global food security. In International trade and policies for genetically modified products, ed. R.E. Evenson, and V. Santaniello, 175–190. London: CABI Publishing.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Hensen, S. 2001. Consumer perceptions of food safety: Survey research on economics and social psychology. In Governing food: Science, safety and trade, ed. P.W.B. Phillips, and R. Wolfe, 91–113. Montreal: McGill-Queens University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hertel, T.W. 2011. The global supply and demand for agricultural land in 2050: A perfect storm in the making. American Journal of Agricultural Economics 93 (2): 259–275.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Isaac, G.E. 2007. Sanitary and phytosanitary issues. In Handbook on international trade policy, ed. W.A. Kerr, and J.D. Gaisford, 383–393. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.

    Google Scholar 

  • Isaac, G.E., and W.A. Kerr. 2007a. Whose vision of the future? The entrenched international conflict over genetic modification. The Geneva Post Quarterly 2 (1): 87–107.

    Google Scholar 

  • Isaac, G.E., and W.A. Kerr. 2007b. The biosafety protocol and the WTO: Concert or conflict. In The international politics of genetically modified food, ed. R. Falkner, 195–212. Houndmills, UK: Palgrave Macmillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jaffe, G. 2005. Implementing the biosafety protocol through national biosafety regulatory systems: An analysis of key unresolved issues. Journal of Public Affairs 5 (3–4): 299–311.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • James, J.S., P.G. Pardey, and J.M. Alston. 2008. Agricultural R&D policy: A tragedy of the international commons, Staff paper P08-08, Department of Applied Economics, University of Minnesota, http://digitalcommons.calpoly.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1010&context=agb_fac&seiredir=1&referer=http%3A%2F%2Fscholar.google.ca%2Fscholar%3Fstart%3D120%26q%3Dj%2Bm%2Balston%26hl%3Den%26as_sdt%3D0%2C5#search=%22j%20m%20alston%22.

  • Kerr, W.A., and J.E. Hobbs. 2005. Consumers, cows and carousels: Why the dispute over beef hormones is far more important than its commercial value. In The WTO and the regulation of international trade, ed. N. Perdikis, and R. Read, 191–214. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kerr, W.A., and R. Yampoin. 2000. Adoption of biotechnology in Thailand and the threat of intellectual property piracy. Canadian Journal of Agricultural Economics 48 (4): 597–606.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kershen, D. 2009. Legal liability and agricultural biotechnology: Ten questions. Available at: http://agribiotech.info/details/KershenFinal%2003%20layout.pdf.

  • Kulthreshtha, S.N. 2011. Climate change, prairie agriculture, and prairie economy: The new normal. Canadian Journal of Agricultural Economics 59 (1): 19–44.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Leger, L.A., J.D. Gaisford, and W.A. Kerr. 1999. Labour market adjustments to international trade shocks. In The current state of economic science, vol. 4, ed. S. Bhagwan Dahiya, 2011–2034. Spellbound Publications PVT Ltd.: Rohtak.

    Google Scholar 

  • LEI. 2009. EU policy on GM soy: Tolerance threshold and asynchronic approval. Available online at: http://edepot.wur.nl/7856.

  • Li, Y., E. Wailes, A. McKenzie, and N. Thomsen. 2010. LL601 Contamination and its impact on U.S. rice prices. Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics 42 (1): 31–38.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ludlow, K., S.J. Smyth, and J. Falck-Zepeda (eds.). 2014. Socio-economic considerations in biotechnology regulation. New York: Springer Science + Business Media.

    Google Scholar 

  • Malla, S., and R. Gray. 2005. The crowding effects of basic and applied research: A theoretical and empirical analysis of an agricultural biotech industry. American Journal of Agricultural Economics 87 (2): 423–438.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Missmer, S., L. Suarez, M. Felkner, E. Wang, A. Merrill Jr., K. Rothman, and K. Hendricks. 2006. Exposure to fumonisims and the occurrence of neural tube defects along the Texas-Mexico border. Environmental Health Perspectives 114 (2): 237–241.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nature. 2010. How to feed a hungry world. Nature 466 (7306): 531–532.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nature Biotechnology. 2012. Agnostic about agriculture. Nature Biotechnology 30 (3): 197.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Paarlberg, R.L. 2002. The real threat to GM crops in poor countries: Consumer and policy resistance to GM foods in rich countries. Food Policy 27 (3): 247–250.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Perdikis, N. 2000. A conflict of legitimate concerns or pandering to vested interests? Conflicting attitudes towards the regulation of trade in genetically modified goods—The EU and the US. Journal of International Law and Trade Policy 1 (1): 51–65.

    Google Scholar 

  • Phillips, P.W.B., S.J. Smyth, and W.A. Kerr (eds.). 2006. Governing risk in the 21st century: Lessons from the world of biotechnology. Hauppauge, NY: Nova Science Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Redick, T., and A.B. Endres. 2009. Jury verdict against Bayer for liberty link rice breaks new ground in biotech liability. Agricultural Law Update 26: 2–6. 11 and 12.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ryan, C.D., and S.J. Smyth. 2012. Economic implications of low level presence in a zero tolerance European import market: The case of Canadian Triffid flax. AgBioForum 15 (1): 21–30.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sandman, P. 1994. Mass media and environmental risk: Seven principles. Risk 5 (5): 251–260.

    Google Scholar 

  • Secretariat of the Convention on Biological Diversity. 2000. Cartagena protocol on biosafety to the convention on biological diversity. Montreal: Secretariat of the Convention on Biological Diversity.

    Google Scholar 

  • Smyth, S.J., and R. Gray. 2011. Intellectual property sharing agreements in gene technology: Implications for research and commercialisation. International Journal of Intellectual Property Management 4 (3): 179–190.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Smyth, S.J., P.W.B. Phillips, W.A. Kerr, and G.G. Khatchatourians. 2004. Regulating the liabilities of agricultural biotechnology. Wallingford, UK: CABI Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Smyth, S.J., A.B. Endres, T. Redick, and D.L. Kershen. 2010. Innovation and liability in biotechnology: Transnational and comparative perspectives. Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Smyth, S.J., W.A. Kerr, and P.W.B. Phillips. 2011. Recent trends in the scientific basis of sanitary and phytosanitary trade rules and their potential impact on investment. Journal of World Investment and Trade 12 (1): 5–26.

    Google Scholar 

  • Smyth, S.J., W.A. Kerr, and P.W.B. Phillips. 2013. Accelerating adoption of GM crops through a trade liability regime. Plant Biotechnology Journal 11 (5): 527–534.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tengs, T., M. Adams, J. Pliskin, D. Safran, J. Siegel, M. Weinstein, and J. Graham. 1995. Five hundred life-saving interventions and their cost-effectiveness. Risk Analysis 15 (3): 369–390. Reprinted in The Economist, August 2001.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tilman, D., C. Balzar, J. Hill, and B.L. Befort. 2011. Global food demand and the sustainable intensification of agriculture. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 108 (50): 20260–20264.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tutwiler, A. 2011. Abstract for keynote address to the GMCC-11 conference. Vancouver, Canada, 26–28 Oct 2011.

    Google Scholar 

  • United States Department of Agriculture. 2013. EU-27 agricultural biotechnology annual. GAIN report no. FR9142. Washington: USDA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Viju, C., M.T. Yeung, and W.A. Kerr. 2012. The trade implications of the post-moratorium European Union approval system for genetically modified organisms. Journal of World Trade 46 (5): 1207–1238.

    Google Scholar 

  • World Health Organization. 2011. Outbreaks of E.coli O104: H4 infection: Update 30. Available at: http://www.euro.who.int/en/what-we-do/health-topics/emergencies/international-health-regulations/news/news/2011/07/outbreaks-of-e.-coli-o104h4-infection-update-30.

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. University of Saskatchewan, Saskatoon, SK, Canada

    Stuart J. Smyth, William A. Kerr & Peter W. B. Phillips

Authors
  1. Stuart J. Smyth
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. William A. Kerr
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Peter W. B. Phillips
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Stuart J. Smyth .

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2017 Springer International Publishing AG

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Smyth, S.J., Kerr, W.A., Phillips, P.W.B. (2017). Refining the Risk Analysis Framework. In: Biotechnology Regulation and Trade. Natural Resource Management and Policy, vol 51. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-53295-0_9

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation