IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/revpol/v31y2014i2p125-147.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Science and Politics in the Regulation of Genetically Modified Organisms in Brazil

Author

Listed:
  • Maya Mitre
  • Bruno P. W. Reis

Abstract

This paper analyzes the regulation of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) in Brazil, focusing on the debates that preceded the enactment in 2005 of the current Biosafety Law and the factors (both domestic and international) that influenced the policy-making process. More specifically, it identifies the social and governmental actors that influenced the congressional debates, showing how their interests and agenda were translated into two different institutional frameworks. Here, the policy outcome was what we call a “hybrid” and “conciliatory” regulatory model, which formally acknowledges the importance of both technical/scientific and social/political considerations in the evaluation of GMO biosafety and engages most of the stakeholders in the regulatory process. The new policy regime also establishes a middle ground between the conflicting demands of promoting agricultural development and protecting the country's biodiversity.

Suggested Citation

  • Maya Mitre & Bruno P. W. Reis, 2014. "Science and Politics in the Regulation of Genetically Modified Organisms in Brazil," Review of Policy Research, Policy Studies Organization, vol. 31(2), pages 125-147, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:bla:revpol:v:31:y:2014:i:2:p:125-147
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1111/ropr.12059
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Haiyan Deng & Ruifa Hu & Carl Pray & Yanhong Jin & Zhonghua Li, 2020. "Determinants of Firm‐Level Lobbying and Government Responsiveness in Agricultural Biotechnology in China," Review of Policy Research, Policy Studies Organization, vol. 37(2), pages 201-220, March.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:bla:revpol:v:31:y:2014:i:2:p:125-147. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/ipsonea.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.