Crossref Citations
This article has been cited by the following publications. This list is generated based on data provided by
Crossref.
Sheingate, Adam D.
2006.
Structure and Opportunity: Committee Jurisdiction and Issue Attention in Congress.
American Journal of Political Science,
Vol. 50,
Issue. 4,
p.
844.
John, Peter
2006.
The policy agendas project: a review.
Journal of European Public Policy,
Vol. 13,
Issue. 7,
p.
975.
Bauer, Martin W.
2007.
The public career of the ‘gene’—trends in public sentiments from 1946 to 2002.
New Genetics and Society,
Vol. 26,
Issue. 1,
p.
29.
Rothmayr Allison, Christine
2009.
Introduction: The Biotechnology Revolution and Comparative Policy Studies.
Journal of Comparative Policy Analysis: Research and Practice,
Vol. 11,
Issue. 4,
p.
413.
Falkner, Robert
and
Gupta, Aarti
2009.
The limits of regulatory convergence: globalization and GMO politics in the south.
International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics,
Vol. 9,
Issue. 2,
p.
113.
Mintrom, Michael
and
Williams, Claire
2009.
Public policy and genomic science: Managing dynamic change.
Policy and Society,
Vol. 28,
Issue. 4,
p.
253.
Sheingate, Adam D.
2009.
Federalism and the Regulation of Agricultural Biotechnology in the United States and European Union.
Journal of Comparative Policy Analysis: Research and Practice,
Vol. 11,
Issue. 4,
p.
477.
Migone, Andrea
and
Howlett, Michael
2009.
Classifying biotechnology-related policy, regulatory and innovation regimes: A framework for the comparative analysis of genomics policy-making.
Policy and Society,
Vol. 28,
Issue. 4,
p.
267.
Mintrom, M.
2009.
Competitive Federalism and the Governance of Controversial Science.
Publius: The Journal of Federalism,
Vol. 39,
Issue. 4,
p.
606.
GREEN‐PEDERSEN, CHRISTOFFER
and
WOLFE, MICHELLE
2009.
The Institutionalization of Environmental Attention in the United States and Denmark: Multiple‐ versus Single‐Venue Systems.
Governance,
Vol. 22,
Issue. 4,
p.
625.
Howlett, Michael
and
Migone, Andrea Riccardo
2010.
The Canadian biotechnology regulatory regime: The role of participation.
Technology in Society,
Vol. 32,
Issue. 4,
p.
280.
Wohlers, Anton E.
2010.
Regulating genetically modified food: Policy trajectories, political culture, and risk perceptions in the U.S., Canada, and EU.
Politics and the Life Sciences,
Vol. 29,
Issue. 2,
p.
17.
MAOR, MOSHE
2010.
Organizational Reputation and Jurisdictional Claims: The Case of the U.S. Food and Drug Administration.
Governance,
Vol. 23,
Issue. 1,
p.
133.
Burgin, Eileen
2010.
Human embryonic stem cell research and Proposition 71:Reflections on California's response to federal policy.
Politics and the Life Sciences,
Vol. 29,
Issue. 2,
p.
73.
Snow, Dave
2012.
The Judicialization of Assisted Reproductive Technology Policy in Canada: Decentralization, Medicalization, and Mandatory Regulation.
Canadian journal of law and society,
Vol. 27,
Issue. 2,
p.
169.
Howlett, Michael
2012.
The lessons of failure: learning and blame avoidance in public policy-making.
International Political Science Review,
Vol. 33,
Issue. 5,
p.
539.
Albert, Kyle W.
2013.
An Analysis of Labor Union Participation in U.S. Congressional Hearings.
Sociological Forum,
Vol. 28,
Issue. 3,
p.
574.
Tran, Jasper L.
2014.
To Bioprint or Not to Bioprint.
SSRN Electronic Journal,
Meghani, Zahra
2014.
Risk Assessment of Genetically Modified Food and Neoliberalism: An Argument for Democratizing the Regulatory Review Protocol of the Food and Drug Administration.
Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics,
Vol. 27,
Issue. 6,
p.
967.
Wohlers, Tony E.
2015.
Risk and Cognition.
Vol. 80,
Issue. ,
p.
21.