Transparency in risk-disproportionate regulation of modern crop-breeding techniques
Despite over 25 years of safe deployment of genetically engineered crops, the number, complexity, and scope of regulatory studies required for global approvals continue to increase devoid of adequate scientific justification. Recently, there have been calls to further expand the scope of study and d...
Autores principales: | , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Taylor & Francis
2021
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8204963/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34107854 http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/21645698.2021.1934353 |
_version_ | 1783708416363986944 |
---|---|
author | Herman, Rod A. Storer, Nicholas P. Anderson, Jennifer A. Amijee, Firoz Cnudde, Filip Raybould, Alan |
author_facet | Herman, Rod A. Storer, Nicholas P. Anderson, Jennifer A. Amijee, Firoz Cnudde, Filip Raybould, Alan |
author_sort | Herman, Rod A. |
collection | PubMed |
description | Despite over 25 years of safe deployment of genetically engineered crops, the number, complexity, and scope of regulatory studies required for global approvals continue to increase devoid of adequate scientific justification. Recently, there have been calls to further expand the scope of study and data requirements to improve public acceptance. However, increased regulation can actually generate consumer distrust due to the misperception that risks are high. We believe risk-disproportionate regulation as a means to advocate for acceptance of technology is counterproductive, even though some regulatory authorities believe it part of their mandate. To help avoid public distrust, the concept of regulatory transparency to demystify regulatory decision-making should be extended to clearly justifying specific regulatory requirements as: 1) risk-driven (i.e., proportionately addressing increased risk compared with traditional breeding), or 2) advocacy-driven (i.e., primarily addressing consumer concerns and acceptance). Such transparency in the motivation for requiring risk-disproportionate studies would: 1) lessen over-prescriptive regulation, 2) save public and private resources, 3) make beneficial products and technologies available to society sooner, 4) reduce needless animal sacrifice, 5) improve regulatory decision-making regarding safety, and 6) lessen public distrust that is generated by risk-disproportionate regulation. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-8204963 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2021 |
publisher | Taylor & Francis |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-82049632021-09-01 Transparency in risk-disproportionate regulation of modern crop-breeding techniques Herman, Rod A. Storer, Nicholas P. Anderson, Jennifer A. Amijee, Firoz Cnudde, Filip Raybould, Alan GM Crops Food Commentary Despite over 25 years of safe deployment of genetically engineered crops, the number, complexity, and scope of regulatory studies required for global approvals continue to increase devoid of adequate scientific justification. Recently, there have been calls to further expand the scope of study and data requirements to improve public acceptance. However, increased regulation can actually generate consumer distrust due to the misperception that risks are high. We believe risk-disproportionate regulation as a means to advocate for acceptance of technology is counterproductive, even though some regulatory authorities believe it part of their mandate. To help avoid public distrust, the concept of regulatory transparency to demystify regulatory decision-making should be extended to clearly justifying specific regulatory requirements as: 1) risk-driven (i.e., proportionately addressing increased risk compared with traditional breeding), or 2) advocacy-driven (i.e., primarily addressing consumer concerns and acceptance). Such transparency in the motivation for requiring risk-disproportionate studies would: 1) lessen over-prescriptive regulation, 2) save public and private resources, 3) make beneficial products and technologies available to society sooner, 4) reduce needless animal sacrifice, 5) improve regulatory decision-making regarding safety, and 6) lessen public distrust that is generated by risk-disproportionate regulation. Taylor & Francis 2021-06-09 /pmc/articles/PMC8204963/ /pubmed/34107854 http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/21645698.2021.1934353 Text en © 2021 The Author(s). Published with license by Taylor & Francis Group, LLC. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/) ), which permits unrestricted non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. |
spellingShingle | Commentary Herman, Rod A. Storer, Nicholas P. Anderson, Jennifer A. Amijee, Firoz Cnudde, Filip Raybould, Alan Transparency in risk-disproportionate regulation of modern crop-breeding techniques |
title | Transparency in risk-disproportionate regulation of modern crop-breeding techniques |
title_full | Transparency in risk-disproportionate regulation of modern crop-breeding techniques |
title_fullStr | Transparency in risk-disproportionate regulation of modern crop-breeding techniques |
title_full_unstemmed | Transparency in risk-disproportionate regulation of modern crop-breeding techniques |
title_short | Transparency in risk-disproportionate regulation of modern crop-breeding techniques |
title_sort | transparency in risk-disproportionate regulation of modern crop-breeding techniques |
topic | Commentary |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8204963/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34107854 http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/21645698.2021.1934353 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT hermanroda transparencyinriskdisproportionateregulationofmoderncropbreedingtechniques AT storernicholasp transparencyinriskdisproportionateregulationofmoderncropbreedingtechniques AT andersonjennifera transparencyinriskdisproportionateregulationofmoderncropbreedingtechniques AT amijeefiroz transparencyinriskdisproportionateregulationofmoderncropbreedingtechniques AT cnuddefilip transparencyinriskdisproportionateregulationofmoderncropbreedingtechniques AT raybouldalan transparencyinriskdisproportionateregulationofmoderncropbreedingtechniques |