scholarly journals Consequences of Biotechnology Policy for Competitiveness and Trade of Southern U.S. Agriculture

2005 ◽  
Vol 37 (2) ◽  
pp. 393-407 ◽  
Author(s):  
Curtis Jolly ◽  
Kenrett Y. Jefferson-Moore ◽  
Greg Traxler
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Comparative Advantage ◽  
Genetically Modified Organisms ◽  
Genetically Modified ◽  
The United States ◽  
Export Market ◽  
Gm Crops ◽  
Southern States ◽  
Genetically Modified Cotton ◽  
Biotechnology Crops

The effect of policy decisions on the competitiveness of genetically modified (GM) crops was examined. The United States has been an early innovator in the development and use of biotechnology crops and has expanded its export market share of the three major GM crops: soybeans, cotton, and corn. Cotton, soybeans, and corn are all grown in the southern states, but these states have an apparent comparative advantage only in the production of cotton, which may be strengthened with the adoption of genetically modified cotton. The influence of biotechnology on the competitiveness of soybeans and corn for the southern states through the introduction of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) is not clear but is probably negligible.

Research on Safety Hazard Control of Genetically Modified Organisms Based on Compensation Laws

2018 ◽  
Vol 23 (4) ◽  
Author(s):  
Chensong Fei
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
European Union ◽  
Genetically Modified Organisms ◽  
Genetically Modified ◽  
The United States ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Safety Hazards ◽  
Safety Hazard ◽  
Existing Problems ◽  
Hazard Control

In this paper, we firstly analyzed the categories and characteristics of safety hazards of genetically modified organisms. Then, we summarized and compared the laws on safety hazard compensation for genetically modified organisms in the United States, the European Union and China. Finally, suggestions were put forward to solve the existing problems in compensation laws in China so as to ensure the healthy and orderly development of China's genetically modified biological industry. 

Genetically Modified Organisms

2019 ◽  
pp. 508-530
Author(s):  
Anne Saab
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Risk Assessment ◽  
European Union ◽  
Genetically Modified Organisms ◽  
Genetically Modified ◽  
The United States ◽  
Legal Framework ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Gm Foods ◽  
Product Regulation

This chapter examines comparative approaches to risk assessment and regulation of genetically modified organisms (GMOs). It first provides a brief background on the emergence, increased use, and controversy surrounding GMOs as well as the important legal questions and complexities they raise before discussing the legal approaches used to assess and regulate risks associated with GM foods, labelling of GM foods, and the application of intellectual property rights (IPRs) to GMOs. In particular, it considers risk assessment in the United States and in the European Union, focusing on the precautionary approach versus the permissive approach. It also compares process regulation and product regulation for regulating the risks posed by GMOs in the United States and the European Union, along with risk assessment and regulation in Brazil, China, and Costa Rica. Finally, it analyses the legal framework for IPRs as they apply to GMOs and comparative approaches to patenting GMOs.

A Framework for Thawing Value Conflicts in the GMO Debate

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Samantha Noll
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Genetic Modification ◽  
Genetically Modified Organisms ◽  
Genetically Modified ◽  
The United States ◽  
Health Impacts ◽  
Environmental Harm ◽  
Value Conflicts ◽  
The Public ◽  
Two Barriers

This chapter explores the ethical dimensions of one of the most contentious applications of agricultural biotechnology: the genetic modification of food products. While the development of genetically modified breeds and seeds has many advantages, the public has consistently expressed worries concerning the adoption of genetically modified organisms. The first section of this chapter uses the AquAdvantage salmon debate in the United States to highlight the most common concerns discussed in current labeling debates, from the potential for environmental harm to health impacts. This analysis illustrates how the polarization of the public debate stems from normative conflicts, rather than a lack of empirical research. Two barriers to achieving consensus concerning genetic modification are identified, before the chapter ends with the introduction of the “GMO Value Framework,” a reflexive approach designed to help cultivate fruitful value-focused discussions concerning current and future bioengineering applications.

Method: Entrepreneurial Innovation, Health, Environment, and Sustainable Business Design

2017 ◽  
pp. 1-7
Author(s):  
Andrea Larson
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Environmental Sustainability ◽  
Genetically Modified Organisms ◽  
Sustainable Design ◽  
Genetically Modified ◽  
Design Principles ◽  
The United States ◽  
Sustainable Business ◽  
Household Products ◽  
Business Design

With Method standing at number seven on Inc. magazine's list of the 500 fastest-growing companies in 2006, cofounder Adam Lowry is searching for a biodegradable cleaning cloth to expand Method's line of “green” household products. Sustainable design principles have been a guiding force in Method's strategy, and being biofriendly is critical. So is sourcing in the United States. But only China can manufacture the corn-based cloth Lowry has in mind, and there is no way to certify that the product is free of genetically modified organisms. Lowry has to balance his firm's fundamental commitment to environmental sustainability against the fact that some retailers refuse to carry products containing GMOs.

scholarly journals GENETICALLY MODIFIED FOODS IN NIGERIA: A long-lasting solution to hunger?

2007 ◽  
Vol 29 (67) ◽  
Author(s):  
Subulade A. Olaniyan ◽  
Adekunle A. Bakare ◽  
Olajumoke A. Morenikeji
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Developing Countries ◽  
Western Europe ◽  
Genetically Modified ◽  
The United States ◽  
Gm Crops ◽  
United States Government ◽  
Genetically Modified Food ◽  
Genetically Modified Foods ◽  
The World

The application of biotechnology in the genetic modification of plants in food production has ledto the appearance of genetically modified foods (GMFs) in the marketplace. From inception, thesubject of GMFs food has been controversial. The use of biotechnology to enhance nutritionalvalue has raised a number of fundamental questions about genetically modified foods or plants allover the world. In spite of these controversies, GMF has been presented as the ultimate weaponagainst hunger in Africa, and other developing countries. While the world debates on whether ornot to endorse genetically modified food in most of Western Europe and give it the acceptance italready enjoys in the United States, we are totally oblivious of the fact that genetically modifiedfood has crept into Nigeria. Nigeria has been a recipient of food aid from countries like theUnited States, that are renowned for producing genetically modified foods. In 2004, Nigeria signeda Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) with the United States government agreeing to supportGM crops. Are GMFs really a good substitute for the natural and traditional foods? Are thebenefits of GM crops as strong as claimed by pro-biotech interests? If GM crops are safe,economically profitable, and environmentally friendly, why then has there been so much opposition,concern and controversy in recent years? If the scenario is so good, if so many millions of farmersand consumers are benefiting, if the increase in GM crops is so impressive, and if poverty,malnutrition and hunger have been alleviated in developing countries, why then have somegovernments imposed bans and why are consumers opposing those products in many places aroundthe world? Is there any substance in these arguments against GMFs? This paper discusses theseissues using Nigeria as a case study. We concluded that GMFs may not be the ultimate solution tohunger and poverty in a developing country like Nigeria.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document