The Regulatory Challenge of Animal Cloning for Food – The Risks of Risk Regulation in the European Union

In this article I describe and analyse the current regulatory developments at EU level concerning the marketing of foods produced from cloned animals. As they are on the verge of commercialisation in countries outside the EU, especially in the United States, foods from cloned animals are likely to reach the European consumers in the foreseeable future. Yet at the moment there is no specific legal framework that regulates such products in the EU.

The European institutions have, however, opened up a debate to determine the appropriate European policy approach towards animal cloning. The recent discussion reveals that the variety of potential yet very uncertain risks associated with animal cloning renders the drafting of suitable legislation difficult. At the same time, Europe’s regulation of food risks also entails certain regulatory risks of its own (e.g. risks of political, economic, and legal conflicts within the EU as well as with EU’s trade partners). By considering the discussion on animal cloning in the broader context of EU’s regulation of genetically modified organisms and of nanotechnology, I identify the legal and political problems of current regulatory options. I argue that such problems should be openly addressed in the regulatory discussion; it is possible for them to be minimised if lessons are drawn from previous regulatory experience.

Copyright: © Lexxion Verlagsgesellschaft mbH
Source: Issue 01/2010 (März 2010)
Pages: 9
Price: € 41,65
Autor: Maria Weimer

Send Article Add to shopping cart Comment article

These articles might be interesting:

The Commission’s New Approach to the Cultivation of Genetically Modified Organisms
© Lexxion Verlagsgesellschaft mbH (12/2010)
The Commission has proposed to legitimise the renationalization of the cultivation of GMOs (Genetically Modified Organisms) accepting the request of a group of Member States who raised concerns at the Environment Council of June 2009 regarding the EU-wide decisions on GMO cultivation. Based on subsidiarity grounds, they requested the Commission give the freedom to decide on the cultivation of GM plants to both national and local authorities.

What Price Flexibility? – The Recent Commission Proposal to Allow for National “Opt-Outs” on GMO Cultivation under the Deliberate Release Directive and the Comitology Reform Post-Lisbon
© Lexxion Verlagsgesellschaft mbH (12/2010)
“After a reform is before another reform.” This paraphrasing of a famous saying from the world of football seems to be a very fitting way to describe the status quo of the European policy on genetically modified organisms (GMOs). The functioning of the EU legal framework on GMOs has since its initial establishment in the 1990s been troubled by political disagreement, deadlocks in decision-making, strong public opposition in the Member States, and considerable delays in the process of authorisation of genetically engineered products on the internal market of the EU.

The New Strategy on Coexistence in the 2010 European Commission Recommendation
© Lexxion Verlagsgesellschaft mbH (12/2010)
The European Union tried to establish a “coexistence” policy for the cultivation and processing of GM and non-GM products after the political agreement that put an end to the 1999-2004 moratorium. Consequently, coexistence is part of this gentlemen’s agreement between States with pro and anti-GMO positions.

EU GM Crop Regulation: A Road to Resolution or a Regulatory Roundabout?
© Lexxion Verlagsgesellschaft mbH (12/2010)
Since first embarking on the road of risk management options for the regulation of recombinant DNA (rDNA) activities and use in 1978, the European Union (EU) has largely failed to create a regulatory and policy environment regarding genetically modified (GM) crops and their cultivation that is (a) efficient, (b) predicable, (c) accountable, (d) durable or (e) interjurisdictionally aligned.

Urteilsanmerkung zur Entscheidung des EuGH zur Zulassungspflicht von Honig mit Bestandteilen an genveränderten Pollen nach der Verordnung (EG) 1829/2003
© Lexxion Verlagsgesellschaft mbH (10/2011)
Die Entscheidung des EuGH vom 6. September 2011, Rechtssache C-442/091, hat in den Medien große Aufmerksamkeit gefunden und wurde in der Regel sehr positiv als eine Stärkung der Rechte des Verbrauchers beurteilt. Vereinzelte Stimmen sprechen von „absurden“ Folgen2; die Landwirtschaftsminister von Bund und Ländern kündigen eine Überprüfung der aktuell geltenden Sicherheitsabstände zwischen Bienenstöcken und Feldern mit gentechnisch veränderten Pflanzen an. Diskutiert werden Abstände von 3 bis 10 Kilometern. Die Auswirkungen auf den Honigmarkt werden unterschiedlich beurteilt. Der Honigverband ist der Ansicht, dass nur Honig mit Spuren genveränderter Pflanzen, für die es in der EU keine Zulassung als Lebensmittel gibt, nach dem Urteil nicht mehr verkehrsfähig ist. Honig, der Pollen als Lebensmittel zugelassener Pflanzen enthalte, sei weiterhin verkehrsfähig. Dabei wird aber übersehen, dass ca. 80 % des in Deutschland verkauften Honigs aus Nicht-EU-Ländern, wie z.B. Kanada, Argentinien und Brasilien sowie China stammen. Dies sind Länder, in denen gentechnisch veränderte Nutzpflanzen wie Mais, Raps und Soja legal angebaut werden. In der EU, wie z.B. in Spanien, wird ebenfalls MON 810 Mais angebaut.



 Keep me signed in

Forgot your password?