IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/fpr/eptddp/146.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Comparative analysis of the national biosafety regulatory systems in East Africa:

Author

Listed:
  • Jaffe, Gregory

Abstract

"This paper analyzes the current and proposed biosafety systems in Kenya, Tanzania, and Uganda using a set of components and characteristics common to functional and protective biosafety regulatory systems. It also assesses how those systems take into account the major international legal obligations that relate to biosafety, such the Cartagena Biosafety Protocol. The paper identifies certain areas in each country's biosafety regulatory systems where further development and clarification would improve the biosafety system, making it more functional and protective. Those areas include: (1) the addition of procedures to ensure the food safety of genetically engineered organisms; (2) the inclusion of the standard and criteria for making an approval decision; (3) the differentiation of regulatory procedures based on the relative risk of the organism; and (4) an explanation of how socio-economic considerations will be defined and assessed. Finally, the paper discusses possible ways the three countries can coordinate and harmonize their national biosafety regulatory systems so they are efficient, effective and make the best use of limited scientific and legal capacity." Author's Abstract

Suggested Citation

  • Jaffe, Gregory, 2006. "Comparative analysis of the national biosafety regulatory systems in East Africa:," EPTD discussion papers 146, International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI).
    • Handle: RePEc:fpr:eptddp:146
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.ifpri.org/sites/default/files/publications/eptdp146.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. McLean, Morven A. & Frederick, Robert J. & Traynor, Patricia L. & Cohen, Joel I. & Komen, John, 2002. "A Conceptual Framework for Implementing Biosafety: Linking Policy, Capacity, and Regulation," ISNAR Archive 310649, CGIAR > International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI).
    2. Traynor, Patricia L. & Macharia, Harrison K., 2003. "Analysis of the Biosafety System for Biotechnology in Kenya: Application of a Conceptual Framework," ISNAR Archive 310701, CGIAR > International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI).
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Resnick, Danielle & Babu, Suresh & Haggblade, Steven & Hendriks, Sheryl L. & Mather, David, 2015. "Conceptualizing Drivers Of Policy Change In Agriculture, Nutrition, And Food Security: The Kaleidoscope Model," Feed the Future Innovation Lab for Food Security Policy Research Papers 258732, Michigan State University, Department of Agricultural, Food, and Resource Economics, Feed the Future Innovation Lab for Food Security (FSP).
    2. Resnick, Danielle & Haggblade, Steven & Babu, Suresh & Hendriks, Sheryl L. & Mather, David, 2018. "The Kaleidoscope Model of policy change: Applications to food security policy in Zambia," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 109(C), pages 101-120.
    3. Falck-Zepeda, Jose & Horna, Daniela & Smale, Melinda, 2007. "The economic impact and the distribution of benefits and risk from the adoption of insect resistant (Bt) cotton in West Africa," IFPRI discussion papers 718, International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI).
    4. Kikulwe, Enoch M. & Birol, Ekin & Wesseler, Justus & Falck-Zepeda, Jose Benjamin, 2013. "Benefits, costs, and consumer perceptions of the potential introduction of a fungus-resistant banana in Uganda and policy implications," IFPRI book chapters, in: Falck-Zepeda, Jose Benjamin & Gruère, Guillaume P. & Sithole-Niang, Idah (ed.), Genetically modified crops in Africa: Economic and policy lessons from countries south of the Sahara, chapter 4, pages 99-141, International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI).
    5. Falck-Zepeda, José & Kilkuwe, Enoch & Wesseler, Justus, 2008. "Introducing a genetically modified banana in Uganda: Social benefits, costs, and consumer perceptions," IFPRI discussion papers 767, International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI).

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Cohen, Joel I. & Paarlberg, Robert, 2004. "Unlocking Crop Biotechnology in Developing Countries--A Report from the Field," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 32(9), pages 1563-1577, September.
    2. Falck-Zepeda, Jose Benjamin & Zambrano, Patricia, 2013. "Estimates and implications of the costs of compliance with biosafety regulations for African agriculture," IFPRI book chapters, in: Falck-Zepeda, Jose Benjamin & Gruère, Guillaume P. & Sithole-Niang, Idah (ed.), Genetically modified crops in Africa: Economic and policy lessons from countries south of the Sahara, chapter 6, pages 159-182, International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI).
    3. Leila Maria Kehl, 2018. "Participatory Ethics in Biotech Research Decisions," Working Papers 39, Birkbeck Centre for Innovation Management Research, revised Feb 2021.
    4. Falck-Zepeda, Jose & Mnyulwa, Shumba & Mulenga, Dorothy & Gouse, Marnus & Masanganise, Patricia, 2010. "The Status of the Inclusion of Socio-Economic Considerations in Biosafety Regulations and Biotechnology Decision Making Processes in Southern and East Africa: Practical Implications and Consequences f," 14th ICABR Conference, June 16-18, 2010, Ravello, Italy 188422, International Consortium on Applied Bioeconomy Research (ICABR).
    5. Falck-Zepeda, Jose & Mnyulwa, Doreen & Mulenga, Dorothy & Gouse, Marnus & Masanganise, Patricia, 2010. "The Status of the Inclusion of Socio-Economic Considerations in Biosafety Regulations and Biotechnology Decision Making Processes in Southern and East Africa: Practical Implications and Consequences f," 14th ICABR Conference, June 16-18, 2010, Ravello, Italy 188118, International Consortium on Applied Bioeconomy Research (ICABR).
    6. Linacre, Nicholas A. & Cohen, Joel I., 2006. "A gap analysis of confined field trial application forms for genetically modified crops in East Africa: evaluating the potential for harmonization," EPTD discussion papers 149, International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI).
    7. Matthew Harsh, 2005. "Formal and informal governance of agricultural biotechnology in Kenya: participation and accountability in controversy surrounding the draft biosafety bill," Journal of International Development, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 17(5), pages 661-677.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Biosafety; Food safety; Genetically modified organisms; Genetic engineering;
    All these keywords.

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:fpr:eptddp:146. 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.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with 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: the person in charge (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/ifprius.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.