Cookies

We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website. By continuing to browse this repository, you give consent for essential cookies to be used. You can read more about our Privacy and Cookie Policy.


Durham Research Online
You are in:

Inclusive governance over agricultural biotechnology : risk assessment and public participation.

Beyleveld, D. and Jianjun, Li (2017) 'Inclusive governance over agricultural biotechnology : risk assessment and public participation.', Law, innovation and technology., 9 (2). pp. 301-317.

Abstract

A public outcry opposing the use of genetic modification of rice has produced a governance deadlock in China, which threatens to undermine attempts to reap the benefits that modern agricultural biotechnology can offer to the Chinese people. It is argued that this opposition to the agricultural use of modern technology is, in large part, the result, not only of lack of public participation in the decisions involved, but of an over-reliance on conventional approaches to risk assessment that do not adequately take account of the interests of all who stand to be affected by the use of the technology. Public participation is necessary, but it must be guided by equitable principles that take proper account of the rights and interests of all stakeholders. It is argued that a governance strategy based on the Principle of Generic Consistency (PGC) of the American philosopher Alan Gewirth has promise to counter the distrust of the regulators that fuels the deadlock because the PGC can be justified from the perspective of Marxist and Confucian principles that dominate the Chinese political and ethical landscape.

Item Type:Article
Full text:(AM) Accepted Manuscript
Download PDF
(671Kb)
Status:Peer-reviewed
Publisher Web site:https://doi.org/10.1080/17579961.2017.1377908
Publisher statement:This is an Accepted Manuscript of an article published by Taylor & Francis in Law, Innovation and Technology on 26 Sep 2017, available online: http://www.tandfonline.com/10.1080/17579961.2017.1377908.
Date accepted:23 August 2017
Date deposited:28 September 2017
Date of first online publication:26 September 2017
Date first made open access:26 March 2019

Save or Share this output

Export:
Export
Look up in GoogleScholar