ABSTRACT

Objections to the current EU regulatory system on genetically modified organisms (GMOs) in terms of high cost and lack of consistency, speed and scientific underpinning have prompted proposals for a more technology-neutral system. We sketch the conceptual background of the notion of ‘technology neutrality’ and propose a refined definition of the term. The proposed definition implies that technology neutrality of a regulatory system is a gradual and multidimensional feature. We use the definition to analyze two regulatory reform proposals: One proposal from the Netherlands for improving the exemption mechanism for GMOs under Directive 2001/18/EC, and one from the Norwegian Biotechnology Advisory Board, outlining a new stratified risk assessment procedure. While both proposals offer some degree of improved technology neutrality in some dimensions compared to current EU regulation, in some extents and dimensions, they do not. We conclude that proposals for more technology-neutral regulation of GMOs need, first, to make explicit to what extent and in what dimensions the proposal improves neutrality and, second, to present arguments supporting that these specific improvements constitute desirable policy change against the background of objections to current policy.

摘要

由于成本高、缺乏一致性、速度和科学基础，对目前欧盟转基因生物 (GMO) 监管体系的反对促使人们提出了一个更加技术中立的体系的提议。我们勾勒出“技术中立”概念的概念背景，并提出对该术语的精确定义。拟议的定义意味着监管系统的技术中立性是一个渐进的和多维的特征。我们使用该定义来分析两项监管改革提案：一项来自荷兰的提案，旨在根据 2001/18/EC 指令改进转基因生物的豁免机制，另一项来自挪威生物技术咨询委员会，概述了新的分层风险评估程序。虽然与当前的欧盟法规相比，这两项提案在某些方面都提供了一定程度的改进技术中立性，但在某些程度上和方面，它们并没有。我们得出的结论是，对转基因生物进行更多技术中立监管的提案需要首先明确该提案在多大程度上和在哪些方面提高了中立性，其次，提出支持这些具体改进构成在反对现行政策。