Loading...
This record has been deleted. Since it is linked to a published record, it is available here for reference purposes only.
Click here to view the deleted recordThis document has been updated. This is not the latest published version. Click here to view the latest version of the record.
Biosafety Virtual Library Resources
(VLR)
published: 20 Jun 2008
last updated: 14 May 2009
An Analysis of Trade Related International Regulations of Genetically Modified Food and their Effects on Developing Countries
EN
- Inter-governmental organization (IGO)
2033 K Street, NW
Washington,
DC20006-1002, United States of America
Phone: +1 202 862 5600,
Fax: +1 202 467 4439,
Email: ifpri@cgiar.org,
Website: http://www.ifpri.org/ ,
Person:Guillaume P. GruèreResearch Fellow, Environment and Production Technology2033 K Street, NWWashington, DC
20006-1002, United States of AmericaPhone: +1 202 862 5600,Fax: +1 202 467 4439,Email: g.gruere@cgiar.org,Website: http://www.ifpri.org,Related OrganizationInternational Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI)2033 K Street, NWWashington, DC
20006-1002, United States of AmericaPhone: +1 202 862 5600,Fax: +1 202 467 4439,Email: g.gruere@cgiar.org,Website: http://www.ifpri.org,
International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI) - Environment and Production Technology Division, Washington DC
EN
2006-02
EN
EPT Discussion Paper 147
EN
Copyright 2005, International Food Policy Research Institute. All rights reserved. Sections of this material may be reproduced for personal and not-for profit use without the express written permission of but with acknowledgment to IFPRI. To reproduce the material contained herein for profit or commercial use requires express written permission. To obtain permission, contact the Communications Division at <a href="mailto:ifpricopyright@cgiar.org">ifpricopyright@cgiar.org</a>.
EN
Author's Abstract:
This paper reviews current trade–related regulations of genetically modified (GM) food and discusses their effects on developing countries. There is a large heterogeneity in current import approval and marketing policies of GM food worldwide. At the international level, the harmonization efforts are led by the Codex Alimentarius Commission, the Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety and the World Trade Organization. While internationally harmonized guidelines for safety approval have been finalized, we show that there is no clear consensus on labeling regulations for GM food, and there is an increasing risk of conflicts among international agreements. We analyze the GM food regulations of two large rich importers, Japan and the European Union (EU) and discuss their differences and their potential impact on international trade. We also show that the effects of international and domestic trade related regulations critically depend on the type of traded products and their intended use: food and unprocessed products are subject to more stringent regulations than animal feed and processed products. Finally, we identify the main spillover effects of national and international regulations on developing countries’ policy making, and suggest four policy arrangements on GM food to enable developing countries to satisfy production, consumption, international trade, and risk management objectives simultaneously while complying with their international obligations.
Table of Contents:
1. Introduction
2. Overview of National Trade related Regulations of GM Food
3. International Harmonization Efforts
4. Major Importers Regulations
5. Effects of International Regulations by Type of Product
6. Effects of International Regulations on Developing Countries’ Policymaking
7. Conclusion
Reference
A brief of this discussion paper is available at http://www.cbd.int/doc/external/mop-04/ifpri-pbs-policy-06-en.pdf
EN
This paper reviews current trade–related regulations of genetically modified (GM) food and discusses their effects on developing countries. There is a large heterogeneity in current import approval and marketing policies of GM food worldwide. At the international level, the harmonization efforts are led by the Codex Alimentarius Commission, the Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety and the World Trade Organization. While internationally harmonized guidelines for safety approval have been finalized, we show that there is no clear consensus on labeling regulations for GM food, and there is an increasing risk of conflicts among international agreements. We analyze the GM food regulations of two large rich importers, Japan and the European Union (EU) and discuss their differences and their potential impact on international trade. We also show that the effects of international and domestic trade related regulations critically depend on the type of traded products and their intended use: food and unprocessed products are subject to more stringent regulations than animal feed and processed products. Finally, we identify the main spillover effects of national and international regulations on developing countries’ policy making, and suggest four policy arrangements on GM food to enable developing countries to satisfy production, consumption, international trade, and risk management objectives simultaneously while complying with their international obligations.
Table of Contents:
1. Introduction
2. Overview of National Trade related Regulations of GM Food
3. International Harmonization Efforts
4. Major Importers Regulations
5. Effects of International Regulations by Type of Product
6. Effects of International Regulations on Developing Countries’ Policymaking
7. Conclusion
Reference
A brief of this discussion paper is available at http://www.cbd.int/doc/external/mop-04/ifpri-pbs-policy-06-en.pdf
- GBF-T17. Strengthen biosafety and distribute benefits of biotechnology
No
No
No
Identifier (ISBN, ISSN, etc.)
Format
78 page Discussion Paper
PDF
Keywords and any other relevant information
Genetically modified food, Labeling, Biosafety, Non-tariff barriers to trade, Developing countries
IFPRI Division Discussion Papers contain preliminary material and research results. They have not been
subject to formal external reviews managed by IFPRI's Publications Review Committee, but have been
reviewed by at least one internal or external researcher. They are circulated in order to stimulate discussion
and critical comment.