This paper considers the challenges entailed in applying the
principles and methods of public participation to national and
international policy processes. It draws on evidence from the field
of biotechnology policy and biosafety regulation in Brazil, Canada,
China, Denmark, Estonia, Ethiopia, India, Kenya, Malaysia, Mexico,
Namibia, New Zealand, Norway, the United Kingdom, the United States
and Zimbabwe. The paper makes a distinction between the
regulatory-scientific concept of "biosafety" and the more
encompassing and socially-defined politics of "biotechnology" and
"Biosafety", developed largely at the international level, frames
the regulatory issues relating to genetically modified organisms
(GMOs) within narrow and technically-defined boundaries. As a
consequence of the drive to harmonise and normalise biosafety
regulation internationally, it has confronted the more diverse,
unruly and contested politics of biotechnology at national and
local levels.
|
