Debating the link between genetically modified organisms and sustainable development (Abstract)

by Aarti Gupta

The article examines whether the emerging concept of "advance informed agreement" within the Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety (the global treaty to regulate GM crops) provides a shared and legitimate basis for global governance of this contentious area. "Informed agreement" by an importing country prior to trade in GM crops can, in principle, be based on three inter-related kinds of decision-making criteria. Decisions can be based on (a) unambiguous scientific evidence of harm to ecological or human health from trade in GM crops (designated "sound" science by its advocates); (b) an exercise of the precautionary principle; and (c) consideration of socioeconomic factors. The article argues that the newly concluded Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety privileges scientific over socioeconomic factors in governing transnational flows of GM crops. Yet "sound science" in this area remains heavily contested, thus providing little common ground for action. Furthermore, while scientific input does remain critical to anticipatory governance of new technologies, an equally pressing challenge is how to incorporate considerations of social impact, and even social need, in designing cross-nationally legitimate governance structures. Determining shared principles for action that can take this into account is the global governance challenge.




For additional viewpoints on genetically modified crops and sustainable development, see the other articles in this latest special issue of the Indiana Journal of Global Legal Studies (available on-line at http://ijgls.indiana.edu).