Evolution of the Regulatory System for GM Crops in Brazil

doi:10.1017/CBO9780511976582.006

5 - Evolution of the Regulatory System for GM Crops in Brazil

Published online by Cambridge University Press: 01 March 2011

Paulo José Leite Farias and

Juliana Mezzomo Allain

Edited by

Michael Baram and

Mathilde Bourrier

Show author details

Michael Baram: Affiliation:
Boston University Law School
Mathilde Bourrier: Affiliation:
University of Geneva

Book contents

Get access

Summary

Introduction

No one will deny that scientific research also has risks and engenders dangers. Decisions have to be taken on research projects without knowing in advance what the results will be (if it were otherwise there would be no point in starting). The dangers of such an enterprise are also obvious. They arise from the circumstance that in modern society knowledge, once it has found its way into the world, can be neither kept secret nor ignored by other function systems as soon as it becomes relevant in their context. This is particularly true for the economy because of the pressure of competition. It also holds for the political system in the military field, and for the whole area of intervention and protection policy. (…) Finally, there are risks inherent in scientific research itself, where, for example nuclear energy is in play or genetic engineering experiments are carried out.

Niklas Luhman

Commercial cultivation of genetically modified (GM) crops has advanced in developing countries and is now widespread. The largest increase among developing nations has occurred in Brazil, where, until recently, national policies had restricted GM agriculture. However, since enactment of a new law in 2005 setting forth procedures for approving the planting and sale of GM crops, Brazil has become the leading exporter of GM soybeans, has GM crops growing on 9.4 million hectares, and now produces an estimated 10 percent of global GM crops, at last count.

Type: Chapter
Information: Governing Risk in GM Agriculture , pp. 113 - 136

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511976582.006 [Opens in a new window]

Publisher: Cambridge University Press

Print publication year: 2010

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Book purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Bauer, M. (1994). A popularização da ciência como imunização cultural: a função de resistência das representações sociais. In: Guareschi, P. A. & Jovchelovitch, S. (Orgs.), Textos em representações sociais (pp. 229–257). Petrópolis: Vozes.Google Scholar

Beck, Ulrich. (1999). World Risk Society. Cambridge: Polity Press.Google Scholar

Einsiedel, E. & Kamara, W. (2006). The Coming of Age of Public Participation. In: Gaskel, G. & Bauer, M. (Eds.), Genomics and Society: Legal, Ethical, and Social Dimensions. (pp. 95–112). Londres: Earthscan.Google Scholar

Frewer, L., Miles, S., & Marsh, R. (2002). The media and genetically modified foods: evidence in support of social amplification of risk. Risk Analysis. 22(4): 701–711.CrossRef Google Scholar PubMed

Gaskell, G., Allum, N., & Stares, S. (2002). Europeans and biotechnology in 2002. Eurobarometer 58.0. Report to the EC Directorate General for Research from the project ‘Life Sciences in European Society’ QLG7-CT-1999–00286. London School of Economics: Londres.

Guivant, J. (2001). A teoria da sociedade de risco de Ulrich Beck: entre o diagnóstico e a profecia. Estudos Sociedade e Agricultura. n. 16. pp. 95–112.Google Scholar

Guivant, J. (2006). Transgênicos e percepção publica da ciência no Brasil. Ambiente & Sociedade – Vol. IX, no. 1 Jan./Jun. 2006.CrossRef

Gutteling, J. et al. (2002). Media coverage 1973–1996: trends and dynamics. In: Bauer, M. & Gaskel, G. (Eds.), Biotechnology: The Making of a Global Controversy. Cambridge: University Press.Google Scholar

,International Centre for Trade and Sustainable Development. (2006). ISAAA Report: Developing Country Biotech Plantings Continue to Expand, Trade BioRes Main Page, vol. 6, n.1 (Jan. 2006), at http://www.ictsd.org/biores/06–01–20/story3.htm.

Jodelet, D. (1986). La representación social: fenómenos, concepto e teoría. In: Moscovici, S. (Org.), Psicología social II. Barcelona: Ediciones Paidós.Google Scholar

Lopes, Ignez Vidigal et al. (2006). Factors Affecting Brazilian Growth or Are There Limits to Future Growth of Agriculture in Brazil?Rio de Janeiro: Getulio Vargas Foundation.Google Scholar

Luhmann, N. (1984). Social Systems, trans. Bednarz, J., Jr. with Baecker, D.. Stanford: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar

Luhmann, N. (1993). Risk: A Sociological Theory, trans. Barrett, Rhodes. New York: Aldine De Gruyter.Google Scholar

Luhmann, N. (1989). Ecological communication, trans. Bednarz, John Jr. Chicago: University of Chicago.Google Scholar

Moscovici, S. (2000). The phenomenon of social representations. In: Moscovici, S. & Duveen, G. (Orgs.), Social representations: Explorations in social psychology (pp. 18–77). Cambridge: Polity.Google Scholar

Nascimento-Schulze, C. M. & Camargo, , , B. V. (2000). Psicologia social, representações sociais e métodos. Temas em Psicologia da SBP, 08 (03), pp. 287–299.Google Scholar

Reinert, M. (2000). Alceste: Analyse de données textuelles. Manuel d'utilisateur. Toulouse: IMAGE, 1998.Google Scholar

Soskin, A. B. (1988). Non-Traditional Agriculture and Economic Development: The Brazilian Soybean Expansion, 1964–1982. New York: Praeger.Google Scholar

Wathern, P., ed. (1992). Environmental Impact Assessment: Theory and Practice. London: Routledge.

Wu, F. & Butz, W. P. (2004). The Future of Genetically Modified Crops: Lessons from the Green Revolution. Santa Monica, CA: Rand.Google Scholar