A Science-Informed Ethics for Agricultural Biotechnology-Crop Breeding, Genetics and Genomics-CSCIED科技核心评价数据库-手机版

A Science-Informed Ethics for Agricultural Biotechnology

A Science-Informed Ethics for Agricultural Biotechnology

ES评分 0 浏览量：1107 下载量：0

DOI	10.20900/cbgg20190006
刊名	Crop Breeding, Genetics and Genomics CBGG
年，卷(期)	2019, 1(1)
作者	Sven Ove Hansson*,
作者单位
Abstract	This overview of ethical issues in plant breeding and agricultural biotechnology puts emphasis on the scientific consensus as the basis for ethical studies and discussions. An introduction is given to major ethical issues in plant breeding, including the selection of socially important breeding goals such as environmental and nutritional improvements, the measures needed to ensure that sufficient priority is given to such breeding goals, potential risks and how they should be weighed against benefits, the interpretation of the precautionary principle, intellectual property rights, and the construction of a labelling system for biotechnological products. Some of the common arguments against agricultural biotechnology are also discussed, among them arguments referring to negative effects of yield increases, the dominance of big companies, and the alleged unnaturalness of biotechnology.
KeyWord	breeding goals; food toxicity; gene editing; GMO; intellectual property rights; labelling; naturalness; nutritional improvement; patents; plant breeding; precautionary principle; risk assessment; uncertainty; weed development; yield
基金项目
页码	-

参考文献
相关文献

1.Busch MP, Kleinman SH. Nucleic acid amplification testing of blood donors for transfusion-transmitted infectious diseases. Transfusion. 2000;40(2):143-59.

2.Glover B. Reducing blood donation deferral period for gay men being called ‘less discriminatory’. Canadian blood services has requested deferral be lowered from a year to three months. Available from: https://barrie360.com/reducing-blood-donation-deferral-period-for-gay-men-being-called-less-discriminatory. Accessed 2019 Jun 9.

3.Wilson K, Atkinson K, Keelan J. Three Decades of MSM Donor Deferral Policies. What Have We Learned? Int J Infect Dis. 2014;18:1-3.

4.Wilson K, Atkinson KM, Fergusson DA, Brown A, Forster A, Murphy MS, et al. Problems with precaution: the transfusion medicine experience. J Risk Res. 2019;22(2):137-49.

5.Price SL. The little beasts. Mol Cell Biochem. 1978;22:183-92.

6.Berg P, Baltimore D, Boyer HW, Cohen SN, Davis RW, Hogness DS, et al. Potential Biohazards of Recombinant DNA Molecules. Science. 1974;185(4148):303.

7.Berg P, Singer MF. The recombinant DNA controversy: twenty years later. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 1995;92(20):9011-3.

8.James C, Krattiger AF. Global Review of the Field Testing and Commercialization of Transgenic Plants: 1986 to 1995. The First Decade of Crop Biotechnology. Ithaca (NY): ISAAA; 1996. ISAAA Briefs No. 1.

9.Amman K. Genomic misconception: a fresh look at the biosafety of transgenic and conventional crops. A plea for a process agnostic regulation. New Biotechnol. 2014;31(1):1-17.

10.Arber W. Genetic engineering compared to natural genetic variations. New Biotechnol. 2010;27(5):517-21.

11.Custers R, Casacuberta JM, Eriksson D, Sági L, Schiemann J. Genetic Alterations That Do or Do Not Occur Naturally; Consequences for Genome Edited Organisms in the Context of Regulatory Oversight. Front Bioeng Biotechnol. 2019;6:213.

12.Kyndt T, Quispe D, Zhai H, Jarret R, Ghislain M, Liu Q, et al. The genome of cultivated sweet potato contains Agrobacterium T-DNAs with expressed genes: an example of a naturally transgenic food crop. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2015;112(18):5844-9.

13.Diao X, Freeling M, Lisch D. Horizontal transfer of a plant transposon. PLoS Biol. 2005;4:e5. doi: 10.1371/journal.pbio.0040005

14.Matveeva TV, Sokornova SV. Biological traits of naturally transgenic plants and their evolutional roles. Russ J Plant Physiol. 2017;64(5):635-48.

15.Keurentjes JJ, Fu J, De Vos CR, Lommen A, Hall RD, Bino RJ, et al. The genetics of plant metabolism. Nature Genet. 2006;38(7):842-9.

16.Ribeiro S. Nobel laureates serving Monsanto and Syngenta. Available from: https://www.etcgroup.org/content/nobel-laureates-serving-monsanto-and-syngenta. Accessed 2016 Jun 9.

17.Hansson SO. How to Be Cautious but Open to Learning: Time to Update Biotechnology and GMO Legislation. Risk Anal. 2016;36(8):1513-7.

18.Hansson SO. Neuroethics for Fantasyland or for the clinic? The limitations of speculative ethics. Camb Q Healthc Ethics. Forthcoming 2019.

19.Schick A. Whereto speculative bioethics? Technological visions and future simulations in a science fictional culture. Med Humanit. 2016;42(4):225-31.

20.Hellenäs KE, Branzell C, Johnsson H, Slanina P. High levels of glycoalkaloids in the established Swedish potato variety Magnum Bonum. J Sci Food Agric. 1995;68:249-55.

21.Valkonen JP, Keskitalo M, Vasara T, Pietilä L, Raman KV. Potato glycoalkaloids: a burden or a blessing? CRC Crit Rev Plant Sci. 1996;15(1):1-20.

22.Ammann K, Jacot Y, Mazyad PR. Weediness in the light of new transgenic crops and their potential hybrids. Zeitschrift für Pflanzenkrankheiten und Pflanzenschutz-Sonderheft. 2000;17:19-29.

23.Boudry P, Broomberg K, Saumitou-Laprade P, Mörchen M, Cuguen J, van Dijk H. Gene escape in transgenic sugar beet: What can be learned from molecular studies of weed beet populations? In: Jones DD, editor. Proceedings of the 3rd International Symposium on the Biosafety Results of Field Tests of Genetically Modified Plants and Microorganisms. Oakland (US): University of California Division of Agriculture and Natural Resources; 1994. p. 75-87.

24.Ellstrand NC. Current knowledge of gene flow in plants: implications for transgene flow. Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci. 2003;358(1434):1163-70.

25.Ellstrand NC. Over a decade of crop transgenes out-of-place. In: Wozniak CA, McHughen A, editors. Regulation of Agricultural Biotechnology: The United States and Canada. Berlin (Germany): Springer; 2012. p. 123-35.

26.Ellstrand NC, Hoffman CA. Hybridization as an Avenue of Escape for Engineered Genes. BioScience. 1990;40:438-42.

27.Baker HG. Migration of Weeds. In: Valentine DH, editor. Taxonomy phytogeography and evolution. London (UK): Academic Press; 1972. p. 327-47.

28.Sukopp H, Sukopp U. Ecological long-term effects of cultigens becoming feral and of naturalization of non-native species. Experientia. 1993;49:210-8.

29.Clark EA. Environmental risks of genetic engineering. Euphytica. 2006;148:47-60.

30.Buddenhagen CE, Chimera C, Clifford P. Assessing biofuel crop invasiveness: a case study. PLoS One. 2009;4(4):e5261.

31.United Nations. Report of the United Nations Conference on Environment and Development, Rio de Janeiro, 3–14 June 1992. Available from: http://www.un.org/documents/ga/conf151/aconf15126-1annex1.htm. Accessed 2019 July 19.

32.European Commission. Communication from the Commission of 2 February 2000 on the precautionary principle. Available from https://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=COM:2000:0001:FIN:EN:PDF. Accessed 2019 Jul 18.

3.European Commission. Commission White Paper of 27 February 2001 on the strategy for a future chemicals policy. Available from: http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/HTML/?uri=URISERV:l21275&from=EN. Accessed 2019 Jun 13.

34.Hansson SO. The Precautionary Principle. In: Möller N, Hansson SO, Holmberg J-E, Rollenhagen C, editors. Handbook of Safety Principles. Hoboken (US): John Wiley & Sons; 2018. p. 258-83.

35.Whelan EM. Can Too Much Safety be Hazardous? A Critical Look at the ‘Precautionary Principle’. Available from: http://www.virginiabiosolids.com/pdf/Precautionary_Principle.pdf. Accessed 2019 Jun 13.

36.Nollkaemper A. “What you risk reveals what you value”, and other dilemmas encountered in the legal assaults on risks. In: Freestone D, Hey E, editors. The Precautionary Principle and International Law. Dordrecht (The Netherlands): Kluwer Law International; 1996. p. 73-94.

37.McKinney WJ. Prediction and Rolston’s Environmental Ethics: Lessons from the Philosophy of Science. Sci Eng Ethics. 1996;2:429-40.

38.Manson N. The Precautionary Principle, the Catastrophe Argument, and Pascal’s Wager. Ends Means. 1999;4(1):12-6.

39.Hansson SO. Great Uncertainty about Small Things. Nanotechnol Chall. 2004;8(2):26-35.

40.Hansson SO. Coping with the unpredictable effects of future technologies. Philos Technol. 2011;24:137-49.

41.Donahoe FJ. ‘Anomalous’ water. Nature. 1969;224:198.

42.Jones G, Whitaker M, King M. Speculative Ethics: Valid Enterprise or Tragic Cul-De-Sac? In: Rudnick A, editor. Bioethics in the 21st Century. Rijeka (Croatia): InTech; 2011. p. 139-58.

43.Rothschild, Victor Risk—The Richard Dimbleby lecture. Listener. 1978;30:715-8.

44.Fiksel J. Toward a de minimis policy in risk regulation. Risk Anal. 1985;5:257-9.

45.Hansson SO. The Ethics of Risk. Ethical Analysis in an uncertain world. New York (US): Palgrave Macmillan; 2013.

46.Hansson SO. Radiation Protection—Sorting Out the Arguments. Philos Technol. 2011;24:363-8.

47.Sarich C. Latin American scientists say Bill Gates’ GMO Golden Rice is a total failure. Available from: https://www.mintpressnews.com/latin-american-scientists-say-bill-gates-gmo-golden-rice-total-failure/221007/. Accessed 2019 Jun 10.

48.Chow L. Greenpeace to Nobel Laureates: It’s Not Our Fault Golden Rice Has ‘Failed as a Solution’. Available from: https://www.ecowatch.com/greenpeace-to-nobel-laureates-its-not-our-fault-golden-rice-has-failed-1896697050.html. Accessed 2019 Jun 10.

49.Hansson SO, Joelsson K. Crop biotechnology for the environment? J Agric Environ Ethics. 2013;26:759-70.

50.Hansson SO. Agricultural Biotechnology for Health and the Environment. In: Ahuja MR, Ramawat KG, editors. Biotechnology and Biodiversity. Basel (Switzerland): Springer; 2014. p. 67-76.

51.Hansson SO, Åman P, Becker W, De Koning D-J, Lagerkvist CJ, Larsson I, et al. Breeding for public health: A strategy. Trends Food Sci Technol. 2018;80:131-40.

52.Klümper W, Qaim M. A meta-analysis of the impacts of genetically modified crops. PLoS One. 2014;9(11):e111629.

53.Kouser S, Qaim M. Impact of Bt cotton on pesticide poisoning in smallholder agriculture: A panel data analysis. Ecol Econ. 2011;70(11):2105-13.

54.Napier JA, Haslam RP, Tsalavouta M, Sayanova O. The challenges of delivering genetically modified crops with nutritional enhancement traits. Nat Plants. 2019;5:563-7.

55.Global Status of Commercialized Biotech/GM Crops: 2016. Metro Manila (Philippines): ISAAA SEAsiaCenter; 2016. ISAAA Briefs # 52.

56.DeFries R, Fanzo J, Remans R, Palm C, Wood S, Anderman TL. Metrics for land-scarce agriculture. Science. 2015;349(6245):238-40.

57.Qaim M. Globalisation of agrifood systems and sustainable nutrition. Proc Nutr Soc. 2017;76(1):12-21.

58.Nordrum A. Antibiotic Resistance: Why Aren’t Drug Companies Developing New Medicines To Stop Superbugs? International Business Times. 2015 Mar 3. Available from: https://www.ibtimes.com/antibiotic-resistance-why-arent-drug-companies-developing-new-medicines-stop-1833248. Accessed 2019 Jun 11.

59.Hansson SO. Experiments before science. What science learned from technological experiments. In: Hansson SO, editor. The Role of Technology in Science. Philosophical Perspectives. Dordrecht (The Netherlands): Springer; 2015. p. 81-110.

60.Long PO. Invention, authorship, “intellectual property”, and the origin of patents: Notes toward a conceptual history. Technol Cult. 1991;32(4):846-84.

61.Rowe EA. Patents, Genetically Modified Foods, and IP Overreaching. SMU Law Rev. 2011;64:859-93.

62.A Seedy Practice. Sci Am. 2009;301(2):28.

63.Chi-Ham CL, Boettiger S, Figueroa-Balderas R, Bird S, Geoola JN, Zamora P, et al. An intellectual property sharing initiative in agricultural biotechnology: development of broadly accessible technologies for plant transformation. Plant Biotechnol J. 2012;10(5):501-10.

64.Heller MA, Eisenberg RS. Can patents deter innovation? The anticommons in biomedical research. Science. 1998;280(5364):698-701.

65.Paul R. Tools for Survival: Proposing a Research Exemption for Agricultural Biotechnology Patents to Alleviate Global Hunger. Georget J Poverty Law Policy. 2010;18:103-26.

66.Adenle AA, Sowe SK, Parayil G, Aginam O. Analysis of open source biotechnology in developing countries: An emerging framework for sustainable agriculture. Technol Soc. 2012;34(3):256-69.

67.Pray CE, Naseem A. Intellectual Property Rights on Research Tools: Incentives or Barriers to Innovation? AgBioForum. 2015;8(2-3):108-17.

68.Smyth S, McHughen A. Regulating innovative crop technologies in Canada: the case of regulating genetically modified crops. Plant Biotechnol J. 2008;6(3):213-25.

69.Goldewijk KK. Estimating global land use change over the past 300 years: The HYDE Database. Glob Biogeochem Cycles. 2001;15(2):417-33.

70.Investment and financial flows to address climate change. Bonn (Germany): United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC); 2007.

71.Pimm SL, Russell GJ, Gittleman JL, Brooks TM. The future of biodiversity. Science. 1995;269(5222):347-50.

72.Butchart SH, Walpole M, Collen B, van Strien A, Scharlemann JP, Almond RE, et al. Global biodiversity: Indicators of recent declines. Science. 2010;328:1164-8.

73.Pereira HM, Leadley PW, Proença V, Alkemade R, Scharlemann JP, Fernandez-Manjarrés JF, et al. Scenarios for global biodiversity in the 21st century. Science. 2010;330(6010):1496-501.

74.Seppelt R, Beckmann M, Ceauşu S, Cord AF, Gerstner K, Gurevitch J, et al. Harmonizing biodiversity conservation and productivity in the context of increasing demands on landscapes. BioScience. 2016;66(10):890-6.

75.Falconer W. How Safe is Your Animal from GMOs? Available from: https://www.dogsnaturallymagazine.com/how-safe-is-your-animal-from-gmos/700/. Accessed 2019 Jun 11.

76.Siipi H. Dimensions of naturalness. Ethics Environ. 2008;13(1):71-103.

77.Fedoroff N, Haselkorn R, Chassy BM. EPA’s proposed biotech policy turns a deaf ear to science. FASEB J. 2011;25(9)2855-7.

78.Mill JS. The Subjection of Women. In: Collected Works of John Stuart Mill. Volume 21. London (UK): Routledge; 1996. p. 59-340.

79.Brom FWA. WTO, Public Reason and Food Public Reasoning in the ‘Trade Conflict’ on GM-Food. Ethical Theory Moral Pract. 2004;7:417-31.

80.Siipi H, Uusitalo S. Consumer Autonomy and Sufficiency of GMF Labeling. J Agric Environ Ethics. 2008;21:353-69.

81.Kymlicka W. Moral Philosophy and Public Policy: The Case of the New Reproductive Technologies. Bioethics. 1993;7:1-26.

82.Heyd D. Experimenting with embryos: Can philosophy help? Bioethics. 1996;10:292-309.

83.Hansson SO. The Moral Oracle’s Test. Ethical Theory Moral Pract. 2014;17:643-51.

84.Beauchamp TL, Childress JF. Principles of Biomedical Ethics. 7th ed. Oxford (UK): Oxford University Press; 2013.

85.Mepham B, editor. Food Ethics. London (UK): Routledge; 1996.

86.Thompson PB. Agricultural ethics: then and now. Agric Human Values. 2015;32(1):77-85.

引用本文

Sven Ove Hansson*. A Science-Informed Ethics for Agricultural Biotechnology, Crop Breeding, Genetics and Genomics. 2019; 1; (1). https://doi.org/10.20900/cbgg20190006.

文献评论

相关学者

相关机构