Free Access
Issue
Environ. Biosafety Res.
Volume 5, Number 3, July-September 2006
Page(s) 127 - 149
DOI https://doi.org/10.1051/ebr:2007002
Published online 24 March 2007
  • ACRE (2004a) Advice on the implementation of the farm-scale evaluations of genetically modified herbicide-tolerance crops, http://www.defra.gov.uk/Environment/acre/advice/pdf/acre_advice44.pdf [Google Scholar]
  • ACRE (2004b) Guidance on best practice in the design of post-market monitoring plans in submissions to the Advisory Committee on Release to the Environment, http://www.defra.gov.uk/environment/acre/postmarket/acre_postmarketmonitor-guidance.pdf [Google Scholar]
  • ACRE (2005) Advice on the implementation of the farm-scale evaluations of genetically modified herbicide-tolerance winter oilseed rape, http://www.defra.gov.uk/Environment/acre/advice/pdf/acre_advice65.pdf [Google Scholar]
  • ACRE (2006) Managing the footprint of agriculture: towards a comparative assessment of risks and benefits for novel agricultural systems, http://www.defra.gov.uk/environment/acre/fsewiderissues/acre-fse-060317draft.pdf [Google Scholar]
  • Altieri MA (2005) The myth of coexistence: why transgenic crops are not compatible with agroecologically based systems of production. B. Sci. Technol. Soc. 25: 1–11 [Google Scholar]
  • BAC (2004) Advice on the British report `On the rationale and interpretation of the Farm-Scale Evaluation (FSE) of genetically modified herbicide-tolerant (GMHT) crops', http://www.bio-council.be/docs/BAC_2004_SC_087.pdf [Google Scholar]
  • Bennett PM, Livesey CT, Nathwani D, Reeves DS, Saunders JR, Wise R (2004) An assessment of the risks associated with the use of antibiotic resistance genes in genetically modified plants: report of the working party of the British society for antimicrobial chemotherapy. J. Antimicrob. Chemother. 53: 418–431 [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Bonneuil C, Joly PB, Marris C (in press) Disentrenching experiment? The construction of GM-crop field trials as a social problem in France. Sci. Tech. Human Values [Google Scholar]
  • Brom FWA (2000) Food, consumer concerns, and trust: food ethics for a globalizing market. J. Agric. Environ. Ethics 12: 127–139 [Google Scholar]
  • Carr S (2002) Ethical and value-based aspects of the European Commission's precautionary principle. J. Agric. Environ. Ethics 15: 31–38 [Google Scholar]
  • Carr S, Levidow L (2000) Exploring the links between science, risk, uncertainty and ethics in regulatory controversies about genetically modified crops. J. Agric. Environ. Ethics 12: 29–39 [Google Scholar]
  • Carter CA, Gruère GP (2003) Mandatory labeling of genetically modified foods: does it really provide consumer choice? AgBioForum 6: 68–70 [Google Scholar]
  • CEC (2000) Communication from the Commission on the precautionary principle, http://europa.eu.int/comm/dgs/health_consumer/library/pub/pub07_en.pdf [Google Scholar]
  • CEC (2006) Report from the Commission to the Council and the European Parliament on the implementation of Regulation (EC) No 1829/2003 of the European Parliament and of the Council on genetically modified food and feed [Google Scholar]
  • Chamberlain DE, Fuller RJ, Bunce RGH, Duckworth JC, Shrubb M (2000) Changes in the abundance of farmland birds in relation to the timing of agricultural intensification in England and Wales. J. Appl. Ecol. 37: 771–788 [Google Scholar]
  • Chapman MA, Burke JM (2006) Letting the gene out of the bottle: the population genetics of genetically modified crops. New Phytol. 170: 429–443 [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Chassy B, Carter C, McGloughlin M, McHughen A, Parrott W, Preston C, Roush R, Shelton A, Strauss SH (2003) UK field-scale evaluations answer wrong questions. Nat. Biotechnol. 21: 1429–1430 [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Christoforou T (2004) The regulation of genetically modified organisms in the European Union: the interplay of science, law and politics. CML Rev. 41: 637–709 [Google Scholar]
  • COGEM (2003) Towards an integrated framework for the assessment of social and ethical issues in modern biotechnology, http://www.cogem.net/pdfdb/advies/CGM030618-02UK.pdf [Google Scholar]
  • Cook G, Pieri E, Robbins PT (2004) `The scientists think and the public feels': expert perceptions of the discourse of GM food. Discourse Soc. 15: 433–449 [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Cook G, Robbins PT, Pieri E (2006) “Words of mass destruction”: British newspaper coverage of the genetically modified food debate, expert and non-expert reactions. Public Underst. Sci. 15: 5–29 [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • de Sadeleer N (2006) The precautionary principle in the EC health and environmental law. ELJ 12: 139–172 [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • De Schrijver A, Devos Y, Van den Bulcke M, Cadot P, De Loose M, Reheul D, Sneyers M (2007) Risk assessment of GM stacked events obtained from crosses between GM events. Trends Food Sci. Technol. 18: 101–109 [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Deblonde M, du Jardin P (2005) Deepening a precautionary European policy. J. Agric. Environ. Ethics 18: 319–343 [Google Scholar]
  • Deckers J (2005) Are scientists right and non-scientists wrong? Reflections on discussions of GM. J. Agric. Environ. Ethics 18: 451–478 [Google Scholar]
  • Demeke T, Perry DJ, Scowcroft WR (2006) Adventitious presence of GMOs: scientific overview for Canadian grains. Can. J. Plant Sci. 86: 1–23 [Google Scholar]
  • Demont M, Tollens E (2004) First impact of biotechnology in the EU: Bt maize adoption in Spain. An. Appl. Biol. 145: 197–207 [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Devos Y, Reheul D, De Schrijver A, Cors F, Moens W (2004) Management of herbicide-tolerant oilseed rape in Europe: a case study on minimizing vertical gene flow. Environ. Biosafety Res. 3: 135–148 [CrossRef] [EDP Sciences] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Devos Y, Reheul D, De Schrijver A (2005) The co-existence between transgenic and non-transgenic maize in the European Union: a focus on pollen flow and cross-fertilization. Environ. Biosafety Res. 4: 71–87 [CrossRef] [EDP Sciences] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Devos Y, Reheul D, Thas O, De Clercq EM, Cougnon M, Cordemans K (2007) Implementing isolation perimeters around genetically modified maize fields. Agron. Sustain. Dev., doi:10.1051/agro:2006005 [Google Scholar]
  • EC (2006) Report on the implementation of national measures on the co-existence of genetically modified crops with conventional and organic farming, http://europa.eu.int/comm/agriculture/coexistence/index_en.htm [Google Scholar]
  • EFSA (2004a) Opinion of the scientific panel on genetically modified organisms on the use of antibiotic resistance genes as marker genes in genetically modified plants. EFSA J. 48: 1–18 [Google Scholar]
  • EFSA (2004b) Guidance document of the scientific panel on genetically modified organisms for the risk assessment of genetically modified plants and derived food and feed. EFSA J. 99: 1–94 [Google Scholar]
  • EFSA (2006a) Opinion of the scientific panel on genetically modified organisms on the post market environmental monitoring (PMEM) of genetically modified plants. EFSA J. 319: 1–27 [Google Scholar]
  • EFSA (2006b) Opinion of the scientific panel on genetically modified organisms on a request from the Commission related to the notification (C/SE/96/3501) for the placing on the market of genetically modified potato EH92-527-1 with altered starch composition, for cultivation and production of starch, under Part C of Directive 2001/18/EC from BASF Plant Science. EFSA J. 323: 1–20 [Google Scholar]
  • EFSA (2006c) Opinion of the scientific panel on genetically modified organisms on a request from the Commission related to genetically modified crops (Bt176 maize, MON810 maize, T25 maize, Topas 19/2 oilseed rape and MS1 Formula RF1 oilseed rape) subject to safeguard clauses invoked according to Article 16 of Directive 90/220/EEC. EFSA J. 338: 1–15 [Google Scholar]
  • EFSA (2006d) Transparency in risk assessment carried out by EFSA: guidance document on procedural aspects. EFSA J. 353: 1–16 [Google Scholar]
  • EGE (1995) Opinion of the group of advisers on the ethical implications of biotechnology to the European Commission on the ethical aspects of the labelling of foods derived from modern biotechnology, http://ec.europa.eu/european_group_ethics/docs/opinion5_en.pdf [Google Scholar]
  • Firbank L, Lonsdale M, Poppy G (2005) Reassessing the environmental risks of GM crops. Nat. Biotechnol. 23: 1–2 [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Frewer L, Lassen J, Kettlitz B, Scholderer J, Beekman V, Berdal KG (2004) Societal aspects of genetically modified food. Food Chem. Toxicol. 42: 1181–1193 [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Friesen LF, Nelson AG, Van Acker RC (2003) Evidence of contamination of pedigreed canola (Brassica napus) seedlots in western Canada with genetically modified herbicide resistance traits. Agron. J. 95: 1342–1347 [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Gaskell G, Allum N, Wagner W, Kronberger N, Torgersen H, Hampel J, Bardes J (2004) GM foods and the misperception of risk perception. Risk Anal. 24: 185-194 [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Gaskell G, Allansdottir A, Allum N, Corchero C, Fischler C, Hampel J, Jackson J, Kronberger N, Mejlgaard N, Revuelta G, Schreiner C, Stares S, Torgersen H, Wagner W (2006) Europeans and Biotechnology in 2005: Patterns and Trends, Eurobarometer 64.3, http://www.ec.europa.eu/research/press/2006/pdf/pr1906_eb_64_3_final_report-may2006_en.pdf [Google Scholar]
  • Genus A, Coles AM (2005) On constructive technology assessment and limitations on public participation in technology assessment. Tech. Anal. Strat. Manage. 17: 433–443 [Google Scholar]
  • Goldstein DA, Tinland B, Gilbertson LA, Staub JM, Bannon GA, Goodman RE, McCoy RL, Silvanovich A (2005) Human safety and genetically modified plants: a review of antibiotic resistance markers and future transformation selection technologies. J. Appl. Microbiol. 99: 7–23 [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Gottweis H (2005) Transnationalizing recombinant-DNA regulation: between Asilomar, EMBO, the OECD, and the European Community. Sci. Cult. 14: 325–338 [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Gruère GP (2006) A preliminary comparison of the retail level effects of genetically modified food labelling policies in Canada and France. Food Policy 31: 148–161 [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Gryson N, Messens K, Van Laere D, Eeckhout M (2007) Co-existence and traceability of GM and non-GM products in the feed chain. Eur. Food Res. Technol., doi: 10.1007/s00217-006-0511-x [Google Scholar]
  • Guehlstorf NP, Hallstrom LK (2005) The role of culture in risk regulations: a comparative case study of genetically modified corn in the United States of America and European Union. Environ. Sci. Policy 8: 327–342 [Google Scholar]
  • Hails RS, Morley K (2005) Genes invading new populations: a risk assessment perspective. Trends Ecol. Evol. 20: 245–252 [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Heller C (2002) From scientific risk to paysan savoir-faire: peasant expertise in the French and global debate over GM crops. Sci. Cult. 11: 5–37 [Google Scholar]
  • Hill RA (2005) Conceptualizing risk assessment methodology for genetically modified organisms. Environ. Biosafety Res. 4: 67–70 [Google Scholar]
  • Hill RA, Sendashonga C (2003) General principles for risk assessment of living modified organisms: lessons for chemical risk assessment. Environ. Biosafety Res. 2: 81–88 [CrossRef] [EDP Sciences] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Hoffmann-Riem H, Wynne B (2002) In risk assessment, one has to admit ignorance. Nature 416: 123 [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Holst-Jensen A, De Loose M, van den Eede G (2006) Coherence between legal requirements and approaches for detection of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) and their derived products. J. Agric. Food Chem. 54: 2799–2809 [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Huffman WE (2004) Production, identity preservation, and labeling in a marketplace with genetically modified and non-genetically modified foods. Plant Physiol. 134: 3–10 [Google Scholar]
  • Irwin A (2006) The politics of talk: coming to terms with the `new' scientific governance. Soc. Stu. Sci. 36: 299–320 [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Jensen KK (2002) The moral foundation of the precautionary principle. J. Agric. Environ. Ethics 15: 39–55 [Google Scholar]
  • Jensen KK, Sandøe P (2002) Food safety and ethics: the interplay between science and values. J. Agric. Environ. Ethics 15: 245–253 [Google Scholar]
  • Jensen KK, Gamborg C, Madsen KH, Jørgensen RB, Krayer von Krauss M, Folker AP, Sandøe P (2003) Making the EU “Risk Window” transparent: the normative foundation of risk assessment of GMOs. Environ. Biosafety Res. 2: 161–171 [CrossRef] [EDP Sciences] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Johnson KL, Raybould AF, Hudson MD, Poppy GM (2007) How does scientific risk assessment of GM crops fit within the wider risk analysis? Trends Plant Sci. 12: 1-5 [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Kalaitzandonakes N, Bijman J (2003) Who is driving biotechnology acceptance? Nat. Biotechnol. 21: 366–369 [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Karlsson M (2003a) Ethics of sustainable development - a study of Swedish regulations for genetically modified organisms. J. Agric. Environ. Ethics 16: 51–62 [Google Scholar]
  • Karlsson M (2003b) Biosafety principles for GMOs in the context of sustainable development. Int. J. Sust. Dev. World Ecol. 10: 15–26 [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Karlsson M (2006) Science and norms in policies for sustainable development: assessing and managing risks of chemical substances and genetically modified organisms in the European Union. Regul. Toxicol. Pharmacol. 44: 49–56 [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Kok EJ, Kuiper HA (2003) Comparative safety assessment for biotech crops. Trends Biotechnol. 21: 439–444 [Google Scholar]
  • König A, Cockburn A, Crevel RWR, Debruyne E, Grafstroem R, Hammerling U, Kimber I, Knudsen I, Kuiper HA, Peijnenburg AACM, Penninks AH, Poulsen M, Schauzu M, Wal JM (2004) Assessment of the safety of foods derived from genetically modified (GM) crops. Food Chem. Toxicol. 42: 1047–1088 [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Krayer von Krauss MP, Casman EA, Small MJ (2004) Elicitation of expert judgments of uncertainty in the risk assessment of herbicide-tolerant oilseed rape crops. Risk Anal. 24: 1515–1527 [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Lassen J, Jamison A (2006) Genetic technologies meet the public: the discourses of concern. Sci. Tech. Human Values 31: 8–28 [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Lassen J, Madsen KH, Sandøe P (2002) Ethics and genetic engineering – lessons to be learned from GM foods. Bioprocess Biosyst. Eng. 24: 263–271 [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Lezaun J (2006) Creating a new object of government: making genetically modified organisms traceable. Soc. Stu. Sci. 36: 499–531 [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Levidow L (2001) Precautionary uncertainty: regulating GM crops in Europe. Soc. Stu. Sci. 31: 842–874 [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Levidow L (2006) EU agbiotech regulation. Soziale Technik 3: 10-12 [Google Scholar]
  • Levidow L, Bijman J (2002) Farm inputs under pressure from the European food industry. Food Policy 27: 31–45 [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Levidow L, Boschert K (in press) Coexistence or contradictions? Agricultural biotechnology versus alternative agricultures in Europe. Geoforum [Google Scholar]
  • Levidow L, Carr S (in press) Europeanising advisory expertise: the role of `independent, objective and transparent' scientific advice in agri-biotech regulation. Environ. Plann. C [Google Scholar]
  • Levidow L, Carr S, Wield D (2005) European Union regulation of agri-biotechnology: precautionary links between science, expertise and policy. Sci. Public Policy 32: 261–276 [Google Scholar]
  • Levidow L, Murphy J, Carr S (2007) Recasting “substantial equivalence”: transatlantic governance of GM food. Sci. Tech. Human Values 32: 26-64 [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Lheureux K, Menrad K (2004) A decade of European fields trials with genetically modified plants. Environ. Biosafety Res. 3: 99–107 [CrossRef] [EDP Sciences] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Lilley AK, Bailey MJ, Cartwright C, Turner SL, Hirsch PR (2006) Life in earth: the impact of GM plants on soil ecology? Trends Biotechnol. 24: 9–14 [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Lusk JL, Traill WB, House LO, Valli C, Jaeger SR, Moore M, Morrow B (2006) Comparative advantage in demand: experimental evidence of preferences for genetically modified food in the United States and European Union. J. Agr. Econ. 57: 1–21 [Google Scholar]
  • Madsen KH, Sandøe P (2005) Ethical reflections on herbicide-resistant crops. Pest Manag. Sci. 61: 318–325 [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Marris C, Wynne B, Simmons P, Weldon S (2001) Public perception of agricultural biotechnologies in Europe. Final report of the PABE research project, http://www.lancs.ac.uk/depts/ieppp/pabe/ [Google Scholar]
  • Marris C, Joly PB, Ronda S, Bonneuil C (2005) How the French GM controversy led to the reciprocal emancipation of scientific expertise and policy making. Sci. Public Policy 32: 301–308 [Google Scholar]
  • Marvier M, Van Acker RC (2005) Can crop transgenes be kept on a leash? Front. Ecol. Environ. 3: 99–106 [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Mayer S, Stirling A (2002) Finding a precautionary approach to technological developments – lessons for the evaluation of GM crops. J. Agric. Environ. Ethics 15: 57–71 [Google Scholar]
  • Mepham B (2000) A framework for the ethical analysis of novel foods: the ethical matrix. J. Agric. Environ. Ethics 12: 165–176 [Google Scholar]
  • Millstone E, Brunner E, Mayer S (1999) Beyond `substantial equivalence'. Nature 401: 525–526 [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Miraglia M, Berdal KG, Brera C, Corbisier P, Holst-Jensen A, Kok EJ, Marvin HJP, Schimmel H, Rentsch J, van Rie JPPF, Zagon J (2004) Detection and traceability of genetically modified organisms in the food production chain. Food Chem. Toxicol. 42: 1157–1180 [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Mitchell P (2003) Europe sees sharp decline in GMO research. Nat. Biotechnol. 21: 468–469 [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Murphy J, Levidow L, Carr S (2006) Regulatory standards for environmental risks: understanding the US-European Union conflict over genetically modified crops. Soc. Stu. Sci. 36: 133–160 [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Myhr AI, Traavik T (2003) Sustainable development and Norwegian genetic engineering regulations: applications, impacts and challenges. J. Agric. Environ. Ethics 16: 317–335 [Google Scholar]
  • Nielsen L, Faber BA (2002) Ethical principles in European regulation of biotechnology – possibilities and pitfalls, http://www.biotik.dk/myndigheder/bioTIK/Udredninger/etiske_principper/engelsk/ [Google Scholar]
  • Nisbet MC, Huge M (2006) Attention cycles and frames in the plant biotechnology debate – managing power and participation through the press/policy connection. Harv. Int. J. Press-Pol. 11: 3–40 [Google Scholar]
  • Noussair C, Robin S, Ruffieux B (2004) Do consumers really refuse to buy genetically modified food? Econ. J. 114: 102–120 [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Nowotny H (2003) Democratising expertise and socially robust knowledge. Sci. Public Policy 30: 151–156 [Google Scholar]
  • Oreszczyn S (2005) GM crops in the UK: precaution as process. Sci. Public Policy 32: 317–324 [Google Scholar]
  • Paula L, van den Belt H (in press) Work package 5: ethics in food technologies. The institutionalisation of ethics in science policy; practices and impact, http://www.bioethics.it/pdf/pc_3/ines_pagina_introduttiva.pdf [Google Scholar]
  • Petersen A (2005) The metaphors of risk: biotechnology in the news. Health Risk Soc. 7: 203–208 [Google Scholar]
  • Robinson RA, Sutherland WJ (2002) Post-war changes in arable farming and biodiversity in Great Britain. J. Appl. Ecol. 39: 157–176 [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Saji H, Nakajima N, Aono M, Tamaoki M, Kubo A, Wakiyama S, Natase Y, Nagatsu M (2005) Monitoring the escape of transgenic oilseed rape around Japanese ports and roadsides. Environ. Biosafety Res. 4: 217–222 [CrossRef] [EDP Sciences] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Sandin P (1999) Dimensions of the precautionary principle. Hum. Ecol. Risk Assess. 5: 889–907 [Google Scholar]
  • Sanvido O, Widmer F, Winzeler M, Bigler F (2005) A conceptual framework for the design of environmental post-market monitoring of genetically modified plants. Environ. Biosafety Res. 4: 13–27 [CrossRef] [EDP Sciences] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Schenkelaars P (2002) Rethinking substantial equivalence. Nat. Biotechnol. 20: 119 [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Schibeci R, Harwood J, Dietrich H (2006) Community involvement in biotechnology policy? The Australian experience. Sci. Comm. 27: 429–445 [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Schiemann J (2003) Co-existence of genetically modified crops with conventional and organic farming. Environ. Biosafety Res. 2: 213–217 [CrossRef] [EDP Sciences] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Schot J (2001) Towards new forms of participatory technology development. Techn. Anal. Strat. Manage. 13: 39–52 [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • SCP (2001) Opinion of the Scientific Committee on Plants concerning the adventitious presence of GM seeds in conventional seeds, http://ec.europa.eu/comm/food/fs/sc/scp/out93_gmo_en.pdf [Google Scholar]
  • Shaw A (2002) “It just goes against the grain.” Public understandings of genetically modified (GM) food in the UK. Public Underst. Sci. 11: 273–291 [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Siegrist M (2000) The influence of trust and perceptions of risks and benefits on the acceptance of gene technology. Risk Anal. 20: 195–203 [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Slovic P (1987) Perception of risk. Science 236: 280–285 [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Spence A, Townsend E (2006) Examining consumer behavior toward genetically modified (GM) food in Britain. Risk Anal. 26: 657–670 [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Streiffer R, Hedemann T (2005) The political import of intrinsic objections to genetically engineered food. J. Agric. Environ. Ethics 18: 191–210 [Google Scholar]
  • Streiffer R, Rubel A (2004) Democratic principles and mandatory labelling of genetically modified food. Pub. Affairs Quart. 18: 223–248 [Google Scholar]
  • Tencalla F (2006) Science, politics and the GM debate in Europe. Regul. Toxicol. Pharmacol. 44: 43–48 [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Townsend E (2006) Affective influences on risk perceptions of, and attitudes toward, genetically modified food. J. Risk Res. 9: 125–139 [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • van den Eede G, Aarts H, Buhk HJ, Corthier G, Flint HJ, Hammes W, Jacobsen B, Midtvedt T, van der Vossen J, von Wright A, Wackernagel W, Wilcks A (2004) The relevance of gene transfer of food and feed derived from genetically modified (GM) plants. Food Chem. Toxicol. 42: 1127–1156 [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Verhoog H, Matze M, Lammerts Van Bueren E, Baars T (2003) The role of the concept of the natural (naturalness) in organic farming. J. Agric. Environ. Ethics 16: 29–49 [Google Scholar]
  • Vogel G (2006) Tracing transatlantic spread of GM rice. Science 313: 1714 [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Wandall B (2004) Values in science and risk assessment. Toxicol. Lett. 152: 265–272 [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Weighardt F (2006) European GMO labeling thresholds impractical and unscientific. Nat. Biotechnol. 24: 23–25 [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Wynne B (2001) Expert discourses of risks and ethics on genetically manipulated organisms: the weaving of public alienation. Notizie di Politeia 17: 51–76 [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Yoshimura Y, Beckie HJ, Matsuo K (2006) Transgenic oilseed rape along transportation routes and port of Vancouver in western Canada. Environ. Biosafety Res. 5: 67–75 [CrossRef] [EDP Sciences] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]