AgBioForum, vol. 03, no. 4 (2000)
Permanent URI for this collection
Issue title: "The Codex Alimentarius Commission and GM Food Labeling." Click on one of the browse buttons above for a complete listing of the contents of this issue.
Browse
Recent Submissions
Item US Regulation of Agricultural Biotechnology : An Overview(AgBioForum, 2000) Belson, NeilThree federal agencies -- the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA), Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and Food and Drug Administration (FDA) -- share primary responsibility for regulating biotechnology in the United States. This article describes each agency's role as it relates to agricultural biotechnology. The article also mentions some controversies regarding the existing regulations, and pending initiatives to revise them.Item Consumer Willingness-to-Pay for GM Food Products in Italy(AgBioForum, 2000) Boccaletti, S. (Stefano); Moro, DanieleThis paper evaluates consumer willingness-to-pay (WTP) for food products obtained through the application of biotechnology using data collected from a consumer survey in Italy in 1999. Survey results show that consumers have a low degree of knowledge of the issue, but an overall positive attitude towards genetically modified (GM) foods. Estimation results of an ordered probit model suggest that WTP is mainly affected by income and information.Item The Precautionary Principle-An Impossible Burden of Proof for New Products(AgBioForum, 2000) Hathcock, John N.The precautionary principle originated in environmental risk management to provide regulatory authority to stop specific environmental contaminations without waiting for conclusive evidence of harm to the environment (i.e., while there was still "uncertainty" about the evidence). Attempts to apply this concept to "proof of safety" for new food ingredients or products has led to the impossible demand of establishing the "absence of harm," with a level of evidence that avoids uncertainty. Any requirement to establish safety with no uncertainty will increase costs unnecessarily, and will prove futile. Such actions would allow arbitrary regulatory decisions to stop new products, ultimately causing actual harm rather than protecting consumers, by denying beneficial products or by substituting a significant harm in place of a small theoretical one.Item What Lies Behind the GM Label on UK Foods(AgBioForum, 2000) Nunn, JanetThis paper delineates the identity preservation strategy being implemented by the British Retail Consortium and the Food and Drink Federation towards genetically modified foods. The strategy is in direct response to British consumer concerns about genetically modified foods in the wake of the "mad cow" crisis. Consumer needs are being addressed through labeling based on robust global traceability systems of food ingredients. However, uninhibited information flows are needed for an effective food system that respects consumers' needs.Item Voluntary Labeling of Foodstuffs Derived from Modern Biotechnology(AgBioForum, 2000) Stull, MariGrocery Manufacturers of America (GMA) contends that foods enhanced through biotechnology with recombinant DNA or rDNA-derived traits should not be labeled differently from other foods; however, it supports voluntary labeling when truthful and not misleading. This paper details criteria to ensure proper labeling, including defining and monitoring the use of avoidance terms such as "GMO-free" and addressing problems associated with applying threshold levels.