IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/taf/jriskr/v22y2019i12p1561-1570.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Consistent risk regulation? Differences in the European regulation of food crops

Author

Listed:
  • Karin Edvardsson Björnberg
  • Charlotta Zetterberg
  • Sven Ove Hansson
  • Erik Andreasson
  • Li-Hua Zhu

Abstract

In the EU legal system, there is a large difference between the procedures and requirements for the introduction of crops that are classified as genetically modified (GM) and crops not so classified. In order to investigate whether this regulatory divide is compatible with real risks two cases of GM crops and two cases of non-GM crops are scrutinized. It is concluded that the regulatory divide cannot be justified from the viewpoint of risk assessment, since the GM/non-GM dichotomy is not an accurate indicator of either health risk or environmental risk. Much better such indicators are available and should form the basis of a legislation aimed at preventing the introduction of crops that are harmful for human health or the environment. If the legislator has other reasons to regulate GM crops differently than conventional crops, then those reasons should be stated in the legislation and determine the types of measures that it prescribes.

Suggested Citation

  • Karin Edvardsson Björnberg & Charlotta Zetterberg & Sven Ove Hansson & Erik Andreasson & Li-Hua Zhu, 2019. "Consistent risk regulation? Differences in the European regulation of food crops," Journal of Risk Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 22(12), pages 1561-1570, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:taf:jriskr:v:22:y:2019:i:12:p:1561-1570
    DOI: 10.1080/13669877.2018.1501594
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1080/13669877.2018.1501594
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1080/13669877.2018.1501594?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

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

    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:taf:jriskr:v:22:y:2019:i:12:p:1561-1570. 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: Chris Longhurst (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.tandfonline.com/RJRR20 .

    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.