Department of Social Sciences, Wageningen University, Wageningen, The Netherlands.
Pest Manag Sci. 2019 Sep;75(9):2310-2315. doi: 10.1002/ps.5367. Epub 2019 Mar 13.
New plant-breeding technologies (NPBTs), including gene editing, are widely used and drive the development of new crops. However, these new technologies are disputed, creating uncertainty in how their application for agricultural and food uses will be regulated. While in North America regulatory systems respond with a differentiated approach to NPBTs, the Court of Justice of the European Union (EU) has in effect made most if not all NPBT subject to the same regulatory regime as genetically modified organisms (GMOs). This paper discusses from a law and economics point of view different options that are available for the EU's multi-level legal order. Using an ex-ante regulation versus ex-post liability framework allows the economic implications of different options to be addressed. The results show that under current conditions, some options are more expensive than others. The least costly option encompasses regulating new crops derived from NPBTs similar to those used in 'conventional' breeding. The current regulatory situation in the EU, namely making the use of NPBTs subject to the same conditions as GMOs, is the most costly option. © 2019 The Authors. Pest Management Science published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of Society of Chemical Industry.
新型植物育种技术（NPBTs），包括基因编辑，被广泛应用并推动了新作物的发展。然而，这些新技术存在争议，导致其在农业和食品用途方面的应用如何受到监管存在不确定性。虽然在北美，监管系统对 NPBTs 采取了差异化的方法，但欧洲联盟法院（EU）实际上使大多数（如果不是全部）NPBT 都受到与转基因生物（GMOs）相同的监管制度的约束。本文从法律和经济学的角度讨论了欧盟多层次法律秩序中可采用的不同选择。使用事前监管与事后责任框架，可以解决不同选择的经济影响。结果表明，在当前条件下，一些选择比其他选择更昂贵。成本最低的选择是将源自 NPBT 的新型作物的监管与“常规”育种中使用的监管相类似。欧盟目前的监管情况，即将 NPBT 的使用置于与 GMOs 相同的条件下，是成本最高的选择。
