Literature DB >> 22476694

Can science justify regulatory decisions about the cultivation of transgenic crops?

Alan Raybould1.   

Abstract

Results of scientific studies are sometimes claimed to provide scientific justification for regulatory decisions about the cultivation of certain transgenic crops. A decision may be scientifically justified if objective analysis shows that the decision is more likely than alternatives to lead to the achievement of specific policy objectives. If policy objectives are not defined operationally, as is often the case, scientific justification for decisions is not possible. The search for scientific justification for decisions leads to concentration on reducing scientific uncertainty about the behaviour of transgenic crops instead of reducing uncertainty about the objectives of policies that regulate their use. Focusing on reducing scientific uncertainty at the expense of clarifying policy objectives may have detrimental effects on scientists, science and society.

Mesh:

Year:  2012        PMID: 22476694     DOI: 10.1007/s11248-012-9613-3

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Transgenic Res        ISSN: 0962-8819            Impact factor:   2.788


  15 in total

1.  Policy-making: Scientists cannot compete as lobbyists.

Authors:  Brett Favaro
Journal:  Nature       Date:  2012-02-08       Impact factor: 49.962

2.  Commercializing genetically modified crops under EU regulations: objectives and barriers.

Authors:  Alan Raybould; Guy M Poppy
Journal:  GM Crops Food       Date:  2012-01-01       Impact factor: 3.074

3.  Science, scientists, and policy advocacy.

Authors:  Robert T Lackey
Journal:  Conserv Biol       Date:  2007-02       Impact factor: 6.560

Review 4.  Transgenic insecticidal crops and natural enemies: a detailed review of laboratory studies.

Authors:  Gabor L Lövei; David A Andow; Salvatore Arpaia
Journal:  Environ Entomol       Date:  2009-04       Impact factor: 2.377

5.  Setting the record straight: a rebuttal to an erroneous analysis on transgenic insecticidal crops and natural enemies.

Authors:  Anthony M Shelton; Steven E Naranjo; Jörg Romeis; Richard L Hellmich; Jeffrey D Wolt; Brian A Federici; Ramon Albajes; Franz Bigler; Elisabeth P J Burgess; Galen P Dively; Angharad M R Gatehouse; Louise A Malone; Richard Roush; Mark Sears; Frantisek Sehnal
Journal:  Transgenic Res       Date:  2009-06       Impact factor: 2.788

Review 6.  Derivation and interpretation of hazard quotients to assess ecological risks from the cultivation of insect-resistant transgenic crops.

Authors:  Alan Raybould; Geoffrey Caron-Lormier; David A Bohan
Journal:  J Agric Food Chem       Date:  2011-01-19       Impact factor: 5.279

7.  Research funding. Measuring the results of science investments.

Authors:  Julia Lane; Stefano Bertuzzi
Journal:  Science       Date:  2011-02-11       Impact factor: 47.728

Review 8.  Reducing uncertainty in regulatory decision-making for transgenic crops: more ecological research or clearer environmental risk assessment?

Authors:  Alan Raybould
Journal:  GM Crops       Date:  2010 Jan-Feb

9.  Recommendations for the design of laboratory studies on non-target arthropods for risk assessment of genetically engineered plants.

Authors:  Jörg Romeis; Richard L Hellmich; Marco P Candolfi; Keri Carstens; Adinda De Schrijver; Angharad M R Gatehouse; Rod A Herman; Joseph E Huesing; Morven A McLean; Alan Raybould; Anthony M Shelton; Annabel Waggoner
Journal:  Transgenic Res       Date:  2010-10-13       Impact factor: 2.788

Review 10.  Is the German suspension of MON810 maize cultivation scientifically justified?

Authors:  Agnès Ricroch; Jean Baptiste Bergé; Marcel Kuntz
Journal:  Transgenic Res       Date:  2009-06-23       Impact factor: 2.788

View more
  6 in total

Review 1.  EFSA's scientific activities and achievements on the risk assessment of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) during its first decade of existence: looking back and ahead.

Authors:  Yann Devos; Jaime Aguilera; Zoltán Diveki; Ana Gomes; Yi Liu; Claudia Paoletti; Patrick du Jardin; Lieve Herman; Joe N Perry; Elisabeth Waigmann
Journal:  Transgenic Res       Date:  2013-08-21       Impact factor: 2.788

2.  Towards a more open debate about values in decision-making on agricultural biotechnology.

Authors:  Yann Devos; Olivier Sanvido; Joyce Tait; Alan Raybould
Journal:  Transgenic Res       Date:  2013-09-13       Impact factor: 2.788

3.  Post-release monitoring: the Brazilian system, its aims and requirements for information.

Authors:  P P Andrade; M A Melo; E A Kido
Journal:  Transgenic Res       Date:  2014-03-23       Impact factor: 2.788

4.  Are Limits of Concern a useful concept to improve the environmental risk assessment of GM plants?

Authors:  Marion Dolezel; Marianne Miklau; Andreas Heissenberger; Wolfram Reichenbecher
Journal:  Environ Sci Eur       Date:  2017-02-16       Impact factor: 5.893

Review 5.  Genetically engineered trees for plantation forests: key considerations for environmental risk assessment.

Authors:  Hely Häggman; Alan Raybould; Aluizio Borem; Thomas Fox; Levis Handley; Magnus Hertzberg; Meng-Zu Lu; Philip Macdonald; Taichi Oguchi; Giancarlo Pasquali; Les Pearson; Gary Peter; Hector Quemada; Armand Séguin; Kylie Tattersall; Eugênio Ulian; Christian Walter; Morven McLean
Journal:  Plant Biotechnol J       Date:  2013-08-05       Impact factor: 9.803

6.  Molecular Characterization and Function Analysis of the Vitellogenin Receptor from the Cotton Bollworm, Helicoverpa armigera (Hübner) (Lepidoptera, Noctuidae).

Authors:  Wanna Zhang; Long Ma; Haijun Xiao; Bingtang Xie; Guy Smagghe; Yuyuan Guo; Gemei Liang
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2016-05-18       Impact factor: 3.240

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.