Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Yearly review of highlights of international biotechnology law and policy developments, genetically modified organisms (GMOs), biosafety, and GM foods and WTO trade regulation. Year in review: 2009. The worldwide proliferation of genetically modified (GM) crops and other applications of modern agricultural biotechnology continues to expand at an impressive pace. In the first twelve years since the market introduction of the first transgenic maize in 1996, the global hectarage of GM crops has expanded by double digits growth rates each year, slowed only to slightly below 10% growth by the global economic recession crisis during 2008 and 2009. The new-record high global uptake of agricultural biotechnology products of 134 million hectares in 2009 entails a dazzling near 80-fold increase of the 1996 starting position of 1.7 million hectares; accounting for an accumulated hectarage of nearly 1 billion ha. The principal GM crops continue to be soybean (77% of worldwide production is now transgenic), cotton (49% worldwide), maize (26%), and canola (21%). In terms of the major producing countries, the US continues to lead the way (with 64 million ha), and Brazil (21.4 million ha) replacing for the first time as runner-up Argentina (21.3 million ha), followed at some distance by India (8.4 million ha) and Canada (8.2 million ha). By stark contrast, the total 2009 hectarage of all EU Member States was 0.094 million ha (of which 80% was produced in Spain), whereas for example Japan currently has no GM crop cultivation at all [all data from the 2009 Report on the Global Status of Commercialized Biotech/GM Crops by the International Service for the Acquisition of Agri-biotech Applications (ISAAA)]. These contrasting figures highlight the longstanding impasse in the legal and policy responses to this burgeoning agricultural technology. The deep and persisting differences in perspectives between trade blocks and nation states on the safety and risks of biotechnology and genetic modification continue to delay or even block most substantive progress in the various international cooperative regulatory fora in this policy field. Widely differing national and regional approaches have emerged over the past two decades, creating high-level political and economic tensions between major trade blocs and partners. Unfortunately, both the nature of this Yearbook as well as space limitations prevent a comprehensive overview of all the regional and national developments across the globe in this policy field. Instead, this report will highlight the most crucial developments in the international realm of ‘green’ biotechnology law. The year 2009 was a relatively uneventful period for the global law and politics of agricultural biotechnology and biosafety; essentially a transitional year with preparatory meetings intended to lay the groundwork for final negotiations on difficult dossiers in the coming year(s). Some useful progress appears to have been made towards important compromises, particularly as regards the issues of liability and redress under the CBD’s Cartagena Biosafety Protocol. Also, some formal resolutions were reached in the aftermath of the ‘trade war’ involving the US, Canada, and Argentina versus the European Union (EU) and its Member States.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».