GLOBAL TRADE IN GM FOOD AND THE CARTAGENA
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT. The UN Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety adopted in Montreal, 29 January, 2000 and opened for signature in Nairobi, 15–26 May, 2000 will exert a profound effect on international trade in genetically modified organisms (GMOs) and their products. In this paper, the potential effects of various articles of the Protocol on international trade in GMOs are analyzed. Based on the present status of imports of GMOs and domestic research and development of biotechnology in China, likely trends in imports of foreign GM food and related products after China accedes to WTO is explored. Also, China’s potential countermeasures to control and regulate imports of GMOs in line with implementation of the Protocol are discussed. China, in recent times, has increased its food and agricultural imports substantially from USA and Canada. China imported soybean 10.42 mill. tons in 2000 and about 15 mill tons in 2001, of which majority are from USA where GM soybean accounts for 60%. The plantation of US Monsanto’s transgenic Bt cotton was increased to more than 1 million ha in China in 2001. Though China has paid great attention to develop biotechnology, it appears to have little scope to export GMOs and GM products. So China may consider a range of administrative measures to implement the Cartagena Protocol and to regulate its import of GMOs and GM agricultural products. Consequently, the Regulation on Safety of Agri-GMOs was issued on June, 2001 and followed three detailed rules issued in Jan. of 2002, with a priority to limit foreign GMOs importing by safety certification and labeling system. These were outlined taking into account policies adopted in Western countries such as green barriers to international trade.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".