Search Results

Frankenfood Free: Consumer Sovereignty, Federal Regulation, and Industry Control in Marketing and Choosing Food in the United States

Thomas O. McGarity

in Labeling Genetically Modified Food: The Philosophical and Legal Debate

This chapter explores the legal issues raised by the ongoing debates over whether foods containing genetically modified materials should, or even may, contain labels informing consumers of that fact. ... More

This chapter explores the legal issues raised by the ongoing debates over whether foods containing genetically modified materials should, or even may, contain labels informing consumers of that fact. Two broad legal issues predominate: (1) whether the law should require companies marketing foods to provide information concerning the presence of GM materials in those foods on the labels; and (2) whether the information that companies voluntarily include on food labels concerning the presence or absence of GM materials is misleading. An overarching legal issue is the constitutionality of any legal requirements imposed by Congress, a state legislature or a regulatory agency.While governmental authorities in Europe have required labeling, the Congress and the Food and Drug Administration in the United States have so far declined to do so. Furthermore, the FDA has suggested that it would be unlawful for manufacturers to label foods not containing genetically modified materials “GMO free,” because that would misleadingly suggest that they are somehow safer or more desirable. One court has even overturned a state requirement that milk containing a particular genetically modified hormone be so labeled as an unconstitutional violation of the free speech rights of manufacturers.This chapter explores the policy and legal issues arising from labeling foods containing genetically modified organisms and critiques the current U.S. approach. It then briefly explores four models for a labeling regime that could be enacted if Congress elects to do so in the future.Less

Participation Rights in EU Food Law

Joana Mendes

in Participation in EU Rule-Making: A Rights-Based Approach

Chapter 7 analyses participation in selected legal regimes in the sector of food law: food additives; novel foods; genetically modified foods. These frame the adoption of decisions that contend ... More

Chapter 7 analyses participation in selected legal regimes in the sector of food law: food additives; novel foods; genetically modified foods. These frame the adoption of decisions that contend directly with the legal sphere of private persons. This chapter illustrates how the growing decision-making powers of the Commission in these matters contrast with a scarce concern for ensuring procedural guarantees to persons affected by its decisions. It develops two main arguments of the book. First, the distinction between general and individual acts should not ground the scope of participation rights. This is demonstrated by characterising market authorisations of foodstuffs. Second, Chapter 7 illustrates which regulatory intervention originates administrative legal relationships and analyses the ensuing consequences in terms of participation rights. Two different layers of participation rights may be identified in the procedures leading to the adoption of market authorisations by reference to the underlying substantive positions: subjective rights and legally protected interests.Less

Consumer Response to Mandated Labeling of Genetically Modified Foods

Nicholas Kalaitzandonakes, Leonie A. Marks, and Steven S. Vickner

in Labeling Genetically Modified Food: The Philosophical and Legal Debate

This chapter presents market data showing that consumers are not willing to pay a premium for non-GM food when given a choice between GM and non-GM food. Its data come from the Netherlands and China, ... More

This chapter presents market data showing that consumers are not willing to pay a premium for non-GM food when given a choice between GM and non-GM food. Its data come from the Netherlands and China, where GM and non-GM foods are labeled. In the Netherlands, consumers do not respond to labels on processed food with information about GM ingredients. In China, consumers do not respond to labels on soy oil that say it comes from GM soybeans. The authors believe that preferences consumers reveal in the marketplace are more significant than preferences consumers state in opinion surveys. They conclude that mandatory labeling does not bring benefits that justify its cost. Voluntary labeling can accommodate the minority who care about the difference between GM and non-GM foods.Less

Genetically Engineered Animals and the Ethics of Food Labeling

Robert Streiffer and Alan Rubel

in Labeling Genetically Modified Food: The Philosophical and Legal Debate

The current debate about labeling genetically engineered (GE) food focuses on food derived from GE crops, neglecting food derived from GE animals. This is not surprising: GE animal products have not ... More

The current debate about labeling genetically engineered (GE) food focuses on food derived from GE crops, neglecting food derived from GE animals. This is not surprising: GE animal products have not reached the market and participants in the debate may be assuming that conclusions about GE crops automatically extend to GE animals. But two GE animals‐the Enviropig and the AquAdvantage Bred salmon‐are approaching the market, animals raise more ethical issues than plants, and U.S. regulations treat animal products differently from crops. This chapter therefore addresses the question of whether there should be mandatory labeling on food products derived from GE animals, examining the likely regulatory pathways, salient differences between GE animals and GE crops, and relevant social science research on consumers' attitudes. It concludes in favor of mandatory labeling.Less

Labeling Genetically Engineered Foods: Rights, Risks, Interests, and Institutional Options

Clark Wolf

in Labeling Genetically Modified Food: The Philosophical and Legal Debate

This chapter considers several different proposals for the regulation of genetically modified foods. It urges that the arguments for mandatory labeling are weak, but that there are good reasons to ... More

This chapter considers several different proposals for the regulation of genetically modified foods. It urges that the arguments for mandatory labeling are weak, but that there are good reasons to adopt a voluntary labeling system that permits producers to advertise their products as free from genetically modified ingredients.Less

A Scientific Perspective on Labeling Genetically Modified Food

Michael W. Pariza

in Labeling Genetically Modified Food: The Philosophical and Legal Debate

This chapter begins by considering how lawyers, chemists and biologists might define “food,” and how each perspective relates to the development of a rational food regulation program. The adjectives ... More

This chapter begins by considering how lawyers, chemists and biologists might define “food,” and how each perspective relates to the development of a rational food regulation program. The adjectives “novel,” “biotechnology‐derived” and “genetically‐modified,” are discussed in light of a food biotechnology continuum that began when humans first farmed crops and domesticated animals. The scientific basis for evaluating the safety of GM foods is discussed, and ecological considerations are addressed. The experience regarding the introduction of a GM tomato product in the United Kingdom by J. Sainsbury and Safeway stores is recounted. It is evident that science can help sort out the environmental and human health safety issues, but cannot settle philosophical and legal disputes that deal with matters beyond those that can be tested using the scientific method.Less

Different Conceptions of Food Labels and Acceptable Risks: Some Contingent/Institutional Considerations in Favor of Labeling

Carl Cranor

in Labeling Genetically Modified Food: The Philosophical and Legal Debate

As a result of governmental actions consumers are prevented from knowing about genetically modified (GM) foods—there is no mandatory labeling, and it is practically impossible to provide voluntary ... More

As a result of governmental actions consumers are prevented from knowing about genetically modified (GM) foods—there is no mandatory labeling, and it is practically impossible to provide voluntary labeling. However, there is an easy case for the voluntary labeling of GM-created foods based on several different institutional considerations. This conclusion is supported by a) different functions provided by labeling—some inform us of risks, others disclose information pertinent to decisions—b) the nature of the scientific studies that inform risk assessment, c) notions of acceptable risks from the risk perception literature supplemented by philosophic analysis, and d) some analysis of the U.S. Department of Agriculture as a trustee for protecting the public's interests.Less

Introduction and Overview: Biotechnology, Risk Regulation, and the Failure of Cooperation

Mark A. Pollack and Gregory C. Shaffer

in When Cooperation Fails: The International Law and Politics of Genetically Modified Foods

This introductory chapter begins with a description of persistent regulatory differences between the United States and the European Union with regards to the regulation of genetically modified ... More

This introductory chapter begins with a description of persistent regulatory differences between the United States and the European Union with regards to the regulation of genetically modified organisms (GMOs). It then sets out the purpose of the book, which is to investigate the challenges — the obstacles to reconciling regulatory differences through international cooperation, and what happens when cooperation fails — through the prism of the US-European dispute over the regulation of agricultural biotechnology or GMOs. The book addresses the dynamic and reciprocal interactions of domestic law and politics, transgovernmental and transnational networks, international regimes, and global markets, through a theoretically grounded and empirically comprehensive analysis of the governance of GM foods and crops. An overview of the subsequent chapters is presented.Less

The Growth of the Market

P. A. Geroski

in The Evolution of New Markets

Shows how the dominant design shapes the nature of the competition in the new mass market. Using the mobile market as an example, it describes the typical pattern of market growth as a logistic one, ... More

Shows how the dominant design shapes the nature of the competition in the new mass market. Using the mobile market as an example, it describes the typical pattern of market growth as a logistic one, with an initial slow rate, followed by a sudden take‐off into a period of rapid growth, which, eventually, slows. It devotes the rest of the chapter to look into the factors that might explain this S‐shaped growth. Genetically modified food and shipbuilding are some of the product‐case studies used to illustrate the analysis.Less

Conclusions: The Lessons of Transatlantic Conflict, Developing Countries and the Future of Agricultural Biotechnology

Mark A. Pollack and Gregory C. Shaffer

in When Cooperation Fails: The International Law and Politics of Genetically Modified Foods

This chapter first offers a set of conclusions and lessons from the analysis of the transatlantic dispute, revisiting five core arguments, and drawing policy lessons from them for the management of ... More

This chapter first offers a set of conclusions and lessons from the analysis of the transatlantic dispute, revisiting five core arguments, and drawing policy lessons from them for the management of the transatlantic (and now global) dispute, and for the future global regulation of GM foods and crops. The second section steps back from the transatlantic perspective that has dominated the dispute and thus our approach to it in this book, and assesses the impact of the GMO conflict globally when transatlantic cooperation fails, and in particular for less developed countries (LDCs) that have served primarily as observers and pawns in the transatlantic struggle over the governance of GMOs. A third and final section concludes with a look at the uncertain global future for agricultural biotechnology.Less

Food, genetics and knowledge politics

Reece Walters

in A Handbook of Food Crime: Immoral and Illegal Practices in the Food Industry and What to Do About Them

This chapter explores the issues of genetic technologies and the politics and power of food production and distribution. It argues that food crime must also be understood within the discourses, ... More

This chapter explores the issues of genetic technologies and the politics and power of food production and distribution. It argues that food crime must also be understood within the discourses, debates and contestations surrounding ‘knowledge’ and its application to food security, distribution and consumption. Those in positions of state and corporate power that have the means to shape the contours of global food trade, notably what is safe to eat and what is not, requires an examination of the ways in which ‘knowledge politics’ plays a crucial role in shaping public discourse and influences political debate. In doing so, this chapter extends definitions of ‘food crime’ to include a political economy analysis of food production, distribution and consumption and the ways in which ‘knowledge’ becomes imperative in a global politics of power and profit.Less

Global and Local Food Systems in the GM Labeling Campaign

Tina Andersen Huey

in The Fight Against Hunger and Malnutrition: The Role of Food, Agriculture, and Targeted Policies

Communications research can be useful for understanding what kind of information is received by social movements, how the information is framed, and how it is acted upon in a policy context. ... More

Communications research can be useful for understanding what kind of information is received by social movements, how the information is framed, and how it is acted upon in a policy context. Genetically modified organisms (GMOs) offer an interesting case study of political uses of information. Use of transgenic technology in food production is portrayed by science-driven development organizations as beneficial, and as undesirable by social movements that share a tangential, if not central, concern with poverty and hunger. In July 2013, Connecticut became the first US state to pass a bill requiring labels on any product containing GMOs. This chapter describes the Connecticut labeling campaign’s stakeholders, identifies accountability and fairness as the dominant frames, particularly as they relate to Monsanto, and proposes the inclusion of anti-GMO movements as potential partners in the fight to end hunger.Less

The Epistemic Dimension of the Political Opportunity Structure

David J. Hess

in Undone Science: Social Movements, Mobilized Publics, and Industrial Transitions

The concept of the political opportunity structure from social movement studies has undergone various expansions, including the development of a theory of the industry opportunity structure in social ... More

The concept of the political opportunity structure from social movement studies has undergone various expansions, including the development of a theory of the industry opportunity structure in social movement studies and of the intellectual opportunity structure in science and technology studies. The chapter then discusses how the theory of the political opportunity structure can be further developed through systematic consideration of its epistemic dimension. This dimension has two pairs of basic features: the level of scientization (the use of technical decision-making criteria) and the extent of public participation in the policy process, and the epistemic culture of risk evaluation (the preference of government regulators for narrow or inclusive methods) and the degree of precautionary preference when making decisions in situations of uncertain evidence. The framework is applied to cases of colony collapse disorder, the regulation of genetically modified food, nanotechnology, the smart meter movement, and climate science denialism.Less

Artificial Ecosystems

Tee L. Guidotti

in Health and Sustainability: An Introduction

Artificial ecosystems have some characteristics of natural ecosystems but are created and maintained by human beings. Artificial ecosystems are much simpler than natural ecosystems and are by far the ... More

Artificial ecosystems have some characteristics of natural ecosystems but are created and maintained by human beings. Artificial ecosystems are much simpler than natural ecosystems and are by far the most familiar surroundings in human experience. “Cultural landscapes” are large-scale ecosystems that have been modified by human beings. Agriculture is an artificial ecosystem essential to sustain the human population. Urban ecosystems are usually hybrid ecosystems that combine artificial and natural elements on a regional scale. The term “built environment” covers anything constructed by humans. Buildings exist to protect people, but some buildings are associated with health risks; the major risks have long been recognized and are governed by building codes. Office buildings are sometimes associated with health problems, usually in the form of a particular set of nonspecific symptoms featuring mucosal irritation and fatigue (called the “sick building syndrome”). Houses also have a variety of health and injury hazards.Less

Plagues & Bioethics

in Activist Poetics: Anarchy in the Avon Valley

This chapter presents Kinsella's views about genetically modified foods. He argues that the modification of genes, the infiltrations of animal, human and plant DNA, open whole new territories for ... More

This chapter presents Kinsella's views about genetically modified foods. He argues that the modification of genes, the infiltrations of animal, human and plant DNA, open whole new territories for occupation and exploitation — creating new dimensions for contamination in the organism. To tamper with food sources in regards to living organisms is to deprive not only the organisms themselves of their rights, but also to colonise and control people on the most basic and fundamental level — in terms of what they eat and how they eat it.Less

Nutrition

Sally Squires

in A Field Guide for Science Writers

Twenty years ago, if someone had suggested that nutrition news would regularly make the “A” section of major newspapers—and often the front page—I probably would have laughed. Sure, through the ... More

Twenty years ago, if someone had suggested that nutrition news would regularly make the “A” section of major newspapers—and often the front page—I probably would have laughed. Sure, through the years, the occasional nutrition or weight-related story has made it to the front page. In 1998, a committee convened by the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute changed the definition of “overweight.” Twenty-nine million Americans went to sleep thinking they were fine and woke up to learn that the government now said they needed to shed 6 to 12 pounds to be at a healthy weight. That story, which I covered for the Washington Post, made it not to just to the front page but above the fold. The straight news story began this way: . . . The federal government plans to change its definition of what is a healthy weight, a controversial move that would classify millions more Americans as being overweight. . . . . . . Under the new guidelines, an estimated 29 million Americans now considered normal weight will be redefined as overweight and advised to do everything they can to prevent further weight gain. Those who are already experiencing health effects, such as high blood pressure, elevated cholesterol or diabetes, will be encouraged to lose small amounts of weight—about six to 12 pounds—to bring them back to safer weight levels. . . . But in a follow-up piece that I did for the Health section, I had a little more fun with the off-the-news lead and wrote this: . . . What do Olympic gold medal skier Picabo Street and Baltimore Orioles third baseman Cal Ripken Jr. have in common? . . . . . . According to new federal guidelines, they are both overweight. . . . . . . So what should they and the millions of other adults suddenly classified as overweight do about their extra pounds? Athletes like Street and Ripken may be special cases, but what about the rest of us? . . . In this follow-up story, I was able to offer a more in-depth explanation of the body mass index—a screening measure for determining a healthy weight that has replaced the old Metropolitan Life Insurance height and weight charts, which used body frame size, height, and gender to offer healthy body weight. Less