查詢結果分析
來源資料
相關文獻
- 開放與防衛的角力:基因改造產品管制的政策抉擇
- WTO之SPS協定v生物安全議定書--就預防原則與風險型態論衝突之不必然性
- 世界貿易組織SPS協定第五條第七項之研究--爭端案例中關於暫時性措施要件與預防原則之評析
- 基因改造食品之各國管理現況介紹
- 生物安全議定書下的事前告知同意程序與WTO之SPS協定中有關動植物進口程序的關係--兼論臺灣與議定書締約國訂定LMOs之跨境運輸協定
- 基因改造產品國際貿易糾紛機制之探討
- 從基因改造食品論預防原則之應用與爭議
- 我國感染性生物材料管理之變革與展望
- 世界貿易組織之SPS協定關於風險評估與風險管理之規範體系與爭端案例研究
- 生物安全風險或科技擴散?淺談印度非法基因改造棉花種子
頁籤選單縮合
題名 | 開放與防衛的角力:基因改造產品管制的政策抉擇=Open or Defense? The Policy Choice on Genetically Modified Organisms (GMOs) Regulation |
---|---|
作者 | 賴沅暉; | 書刊名 | 行政暨政策學報 |
卷期 | 49 2009.12[民98.12] |
頁次 | 頁39-78 |
分類號 | 412.25 |
關鍵詞 | 基因改造生物體; 生物安全; 管制政策; 世界貿易組織; 風險; Bio-safety; Genetically modified organisms; GMOs; Risk; WTO; Regulatory policy; |
語文 | 中文(Chinese) |
中文摘要 | 近十年來,種種關於「基因改造生物體」 (GMOs) 應如何發展的論辯,已深深地影響到各國政府的相關管制政策制定與治理體系建構。傳統上,政府對科技進行管制與治理的目的,主要在提升科技運用的安全條件,藉以緩和其可能為民眾所帶來的風險。然而,在如何讓 GMOs 進入市場的管制議題上,美國與歐盟雖然有著相同的政策目標,就是為民眾提供一個安全的糧食供給環境,以及具有國際公信力的管制體系,但彼此卻採取了兩種截然不同的管制途徑,導致雙方在 GMOs 的管制議題上,形成極大衝突,並使雙方關係一度緊張。有鑑於此,本文的主要目的,除闡釋美國與歐盟由於社會、政治、制度差異,在 GMOs 管制政策因彼此歧異所引發的衝突外,並探討歐美兩種不同的管制架構與途徑,如何對國際相關治理形成衝擊。同時,本文也將於國際層面上,進一步討論在目前影響各國管制政策層面最廣的卡塔赫納生物安全議定書與 WTO 規則,指出在兩者管制思維與目標不同而所產生的衝突中,協調架構建立的困難,與發展中國家在面對此兩種相互矛盾,且不相容的國際治理體系時,制定國內相關管制政策所面臨的困境。最後本文將試圖提出,若歐美雙方能將彼此的管制政策衝突回歸至 WTO 體制下進行調和,可能是對目前 GMOs 爭端最佳的協調與解決途徑。 |
英文摘要 | Policy debates over the development of new GMOs (genetically modified Organisms) frequently implicate state’s regulation and governance, the purpose of which has traditionally been to mitigate the risk of new technologies through promotion of conditions of safe use. However, although the United States and the European Union share a common desire to provide a safe food supply and credible regulatory systems, they have adopted two very different regulatory approaches to deal with the GMOs coming to market. Consequently, the US-EU relationship has become fraught with conflict over the GM foods issue. This paper explores the nature of the two regulatory systems and the underlying social, political, and institutional factors that contributed to the development of these systems. It then explores the impact of these two regulatory systems on international trade. We distinguish between producer protectionism, a commonly recognized trade impediment, and overprotection of consumers that can also have trade implications. Because the trade conflicts over GM foods could result in serious consequences for both the US-EU relationship and the multilateral system of trade rules, various attempts at bilateral and multilateral reconciliation have been made. Unfortunately, most of these attempts have stalled or failed. Finally, the paper explores the SPS agreement of TO as an only possible solution to the conflict and could allow the EU and the US to reach consensus without resulting in major trade disruptions. |
本系統之摘要資訊系依該期刊論文摘要之資訊為主。