The precautionary principle: Making managerial decisions on GMOs is difficult

Jacobus N. Eloff,Fredrika W. Jansen van Rijssen,E. Jane Morris

doi:10.17159/sajs.2015/20130255

Jacobus N. Eloff, Fredrika W. Jansen van Rijssen + Show 1 more

Open Access

https://doi.org/10.17159/sajs.2015/20130255

Copy DOI

Abstract

The precautionary approach of the Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety, if incorporated into legislation of countries as a precautionary principle (PP), could cause great difficulty in decision‑making on genetically modified organisms. No consensus seems to be possible on the interpretation of the PP, as responsibility often is passed on to political decision‑making and, eventually, to court rulings. A case study on the assessment of possible unintended effects of endogenous allergens illustrates the complexity decision‑makers may experience. We review the descriptions of the PP and the debate on the interpretation and conclusions that a number of authors have come to, as a step closer to a solution in decision‑making. South Africa may have to consider the PP in the broader context of its food security needs, which would require improved communication as an additional step in the process of risk analysis.

Highlights

A lack of coherence is observed in decisions made by governments for control of genetically modified (GM) crops
International agreement exists on the general approach to risk and safety assessment of food from genetic modification, and many countries follow the international guidelines, debates on matters such as possible unintended effects from this technology are currently prominent
It seems that some regulatory authorities are overreacting by asking for more and more information to confirm possible unintended differences between the endogenous allergens of the genetically modified organisms (GMOs) and its non‐GMO near‐isoline

Summary

Introduction

A lack of coherence is observed in decisions made by governments for control of genetically modified (GM) crops. International agreement exists on the general approach to risk and safety assessment of food from genetic modification, and many countries follow the international guidelines, debates on matters such as possible unintended effects from this technology are currently prominent. Wingspread Statement on the Precautionary Principle[41]: Where an activity raises threats of harm to human health or the environment precautionary measure should be taken even if some cause and effect relationships are not fully established scientifically In this context the proponent of the activity, rather than the public, should bear the burden of proof. Valuable lessons were learned from this case, one of which was that demands for additional data, as a matter of ‘nice to know’, illustrating the interpretation of ‘precaution’ by some groups in the society could result in costly delays to the applicant, as well as the complainant and government

Key issues in the precautionary principle

Findings

Conclusions and recommendations