Agriculture Reference
In-Depth Information
governments and the industrial lobby for allegedly using famine in Africa
to foster the spread of GM food to developing countries.
4
In response to the criticism, European governments have attempted
to improve risk assessment methods and their scientific basis and to tailor
public policies to the growing demand for transparency, accountability,
and public participation. The form such public participation might take,
how it would contribute to greater transparency and accountability, and
how it would shape more effective and legitimate public policies have yet
to be fully resolved.
This chapter attempts to clarify these poorly articulated concepts,
starting with the assumption that discourse and public engagement are
indeed positive and necessary for solving the GMO controversy. We
believe that the growing practice of voluntary sustainability report-
ing by companies can serve to enhance a discourse, including the
widest possible range of participants, some of whom have been until
now kept outside the debate. A multi-stakeholder discourse so cre-
ated enhances societal participation in the strategic corporate deci-
sions regarding the research and development trajectories for agricul-
tural GMOs - constructive technology assessment - and elevates the
idea of social accountability and social responsibility of producers of
GMOs. We suggest that bounded sociotechnical experiments (BSTEs),
small-scale experiments for introducing new GMOs technology designed
for the purpose of enhancing social learning, are a suitable instrument
for enhancing and enriching the societal discourse and for improving
technology assessment.
GMOs in Agricultureand Food: Risks, PublicPerceptions,
andRegulation
In food biotechnology, genetic modification techniques have been exten-
sively applied to enhance enzymes production by microorganisms used
4
N. Zerbe, Feeding the Famine? American Food Aid and the GMODebate in Southern
Africa, 29
Food Policy
2593-2608 (2004).
