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...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Herman, Rod A., Storer, Nicholas P., Anderson, Jennifer A., Amijee, Firoz, Cnudde, Filip, Raybould, Alan
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