جوانب اخلاقی و حقوقی دستورزی محصولات زراعی از منظر مسؤولیت مدنی در کامنلا
مجله اخلاق زیستی- علمی پژوهشی,
دوره 8 شماره 29 (1397),
3 بهمن 2019
,
صفحه 63-75
https://doi.org/10.22037/bioeth.v8i29.23553
چکیده
زمینه و هدف: طی دهه گذشته تولید غلات تراریخته با استفاده از فناوریهای زیستی، توجهات جهانی را به خود معطوف داشته است. هدف از این مطالعه تحلیل جوانب اخلاقی و حقوقی مرتبط با دستورزی ژنتیکی محصولات زراعی از نگاه مسؤولیت مدنی در کامنلا میباشد.
مواد و روشها: در این مطالعه تحلیلی، مقالات منتشره در زمینه مسائل اخلاقی و حقوقی محصولات زراعی تراریخته به صورت هدفمند جستجو و مرور شده و سپس استدلالات مدافعان و مخالفان با نظر به مسؤولیت مدنی در کامنلا مورد تحلیل قرار گرفت.
یافتهها: با وجود زیانهایی که مهندسی ژنتیکی محصولات غذایی میتواند داشته باشد، اصلاح ژنتیکی محصولات زراعی میتواند موجب تولید اقلام پربازده در مقایسه با کشاورزی سنتی، افزایش دسترسی عموم، کاهش استفاده از آفتکشها، کاهش تخریب سطح خاک و حفاظت بیشتر موجودات زنده درون آن گردد. بنابراین استفاده از محصولات تراریخته باید بر اساس موازنه منافع و مضرات آن صورت پذیرد. یک راه برونرفت از این دوگانگی، احترام به حق انتخاب مصرفکنندگان از طریق استفاده از برچسبهای معرفی محصولات تراریخته میباشد. مسؤولیت مدنی یک مسیر شناختهشده برای جبران خسارت است، ولیکن نمیتواند تمام ابعاد مرتبط با این حوزه را جبران کند؛ طرح دعوی حقوقی در این رابطه بسیار پرهزینه و حصول نتیجه نیز محل تردید است، به علاوه همه موضوعات مشمول مسؤولیت ناشی از آلودگی ژنتیکی و اثرات آن قانون تعریف نشده است.
نتیجهگیری: چالشهای اخلاقی و حقوقی متعدد دستورزی محصولات زراعی تراریخته و ایجاد مسؤولیتهای ناخواسته برای صاحبان این محصولات و نیز کشاورزان سنتی، دخالت سریع قانونگذار در این حوزه را ایجاب مینماید.
- اخلاق زیستی؛ محصولات زراعی؛ تراریخته؛ مسؤولیت مدنی؛ کامنلا
ارجاع به مقاله
مراجع
Keith EM. Intellectual Property Rights in Agriculture and the Interests of Asian-Pacific Economies. World Economy 2006; 29(12): 715-719.
Tester M. Seeking Clarity in the Debate over the Safety of GM Foods. Nature 1999; 402(11): 575-575.
Monsanto Co. v. Trantham. US District Court for the Western District of Tennessee - 156 F. Supp. 2d 855 (W.D. Tenn. 2001). Available at: https://www.law.justia.com/cases/federal/district-courts/ FSupp2/156/855/2317935.
Cockburn A. Assuring the Safety of Genetically Modified (GM) Foods: the Importance of a Holistic, Integrative Approach. Biotechnology 2002; 98(6): 79-80.
Kallman M. Genetically Modified Crops and the Future of World Agriculture. Earth Trends 2008; World Resources Institute; Last Visited May 18, 2018. Available at: http://www.earthtrends.wri.org/updates/node/313.
Halford NG, Shewry PR. Genetically modified crops: methodology, benefits, regulation and public concerns. British Medical Bulletin 2000; 56(1): 62-73.
Wolf MM, Bertolini P, Parker-Garcia J. 12 A Comparison of Consumer Attitudes towards GM Food in Italy and the USA. Consumer Acceptance of Genetically Modified Foods. Academia 2004; 28(12): 132-138.
Pusztai A, Bardocz S, Ewen SW. Genetically modified food: potential human health effects en: Food Safety: contaminants and toxins. Edinburgh: Scottish Agricultural College 2003; 34(18): 347-354.
Beever DE, Kemp CF. Safety issues associated with the DNA in animal feed derived from genetically modified crops. A review of scientific and regulatory procedures. In Nutrition Abstracts and Reviews. Series A. Human and Experimental 2000; 33(1): 197-204.
Clark N, Stokes K, Mugabe J. Biotechnology and Development: Threats and Promises for the 21st Century. Futures 2002; 34(9-10): 785-806.
Van den Bergh JC, Holley JM. An environmental–economic assessment of genetic modification of agricultural crops. Futures 2002; 34(9-10): 807-822.
Cullet P. Farmer Liability and GM Contamination: Schmeiser Judgment. Economic and Political Weekly 2004; 39(12): 2551-2554.
Simpson EC, Norris CE, Law JR, Thomas JE, Sweet JB. Gene flow in genetically modified herbicide tolerant oilseed rape (Brassica napus) in the UK. Gene Flow and Agriculture Relevance for Transgenic Crops 1999; 28(12): 214-218.
Belcher K, Nolan J, Phillips PW. Genetically modified crops and agricultural landscapes: spatial patterns of contamination. Ecological Economics 2005; 53(3): 387-401.
Makanya Z. Twelve reasons for Africa to reject GM crops. Seedling magazine. Grain 2004; 19(12): 123-135.
Lee M, Burrell R. Liability for the Escape of GM Seeds: Pursuing the Victim. Modern Law Review 2002; 65(15): 517-524.
Mark C. The Privatization of Food: Corporate Control of Biotechnology. Agronomy 2009; 92(28): 803-805.
Ikechi M. Adventitious Presence of Patented Genetically Modified Organisms: Is Intent Necessary for Actions in Infringement. Bulletin of Science, Technology & Society 2007; 27(4): 314-321.
Rogers N, Seeds, Weeds R, Greed A. An Analysis of the Gene Technology Act 2000 (Cth), Its Effect on Property Rights, and the Legal and Policy Dimensions of a Constitutional Challenge. Macquarie Law2002; 2(3): 11-12.
Truswell S. Genetically Modified Plant Foods - Hopes and Fears. Macquarie Law2002; 2(3): 177-178.
Yount L. Ethics of Genetic Engineering. California: Greenhaven Press; 2002.
Frederick H. The Environmental and Post-Environmental Politics of Genetically Modified Crops and Foods. International Environment Policy 2005; 14(3): 309-310.
Wickson F. Australia’s Regulation of Genetically Modified Crops: Are We Risking Sustainability? Australian Journal of Emerging Technologies & Society 2004; 2(3): 36-40.
Torgersen H. The Real and Perceived Risks of Genetically Modified Organisms. Embo Reports 2004; 5(1S): 17-21.
Kelly S. Attack of the Killer Tomatoes? Corporate Liability for the International Propagation of Genetically Altered Agricultural Products. Transnational Law 1997; 10(8): 153-158.
Kallman M. Genetically Modified Crops and the Future of World Agriculture. Earth Trends 2008; World Resources Institute; Last Visited May 18, 2018. Available at: http://www.earthtrends.wri.org/updates/node/313.
Borlaug N. Feeding a World of 10 Billion People: The Miracle Ahead. Vitro Cellular & Developmental Biology-Plant 2002; 38(2): 221-228.
Diouf J. Benefits of Biotechnology in Fighting Hunger and Malnutrition and Calls for Open Debate on Potential Risks (May 14, 2001). Last Visited May 19, 2017. Available at: http://www.fao.org/WAICENT/ OIS/PRESS_NE/PRESSENG/2001/pren0131.htm.
Nigel G, Peter R. Genetically Modified Crops: Methodology, Benefits, Regulation and Public Concerns. British Medical Bulletin 2000; 56(12): 62-66.
Motavalli P. Impact of Genetically Modified Crops and Their Management on Soil Microbially Mediated Plant Nutrient Transformations. Environmental Quality 2004; 33(12): 816-824.
Atella G. The Impact of Genetic Modification of Human Foods in the 21st Century: A Review. Biotechnology Advances 2000; 18(12): 179-206.
Gurinder J. Transgenic Crops and Biosafety Concerns. Society & Culture 2004; 70(23): 305-306.
Richard Y. Managing Liability Associated with Genetically Modified Crops, Intellectual Property Management In Health And Agricultural Innovation: A Handbook Of Best Practices. USA: MIHR (Centre for the Management of Intellectual Property in Health Research and Development), Oxford Centre for Innovation; 2007.
Bristow K. GMO’s Liability for "GM" Contamination. Australasian Biotechnology 2000; 10(4): 37-39.
Adcock M. Intellectual Property, Genetically Modified Crops and Bioethics. Biotechnology 2007; 2(3): 10-88.
Siebrasse N. The Innocent Bystander Problem in the Patenting of Higher Life Forms. McGill law Journal 2004; 49(12): 349-360.
Paul J, Smith C. The Problem of Social Cost in a Genetically Modified Age. USA Legal Studies Research 2005; 6(2): 24-35.
Roger A. Legal Issues Related to the Use and Ownership of Genetically Modified Organisms. Washburn Law Journal 2004; 43(12): 611-625.
Cullet P. Monsanto v Schmeiser: A Landmark Decision concerning Farmer Liability and Transgenic Contamination. Environmental Law 2005; 17(6): 83-98.
Lee M, Burrell R. Liability for the Escape of GM Seeds: Pursuing the Victim. Modern Law Review 2002; 65(41): 517-519.
Drew L. Straying Crops and Patent Rights. Washburn Law Journal 2004; 43(12): 575-582.
Sherman B. Biological Inventions and the Problem of Passive Infringement. Australian Intellectual Property Journal 2002; 13(6): 146-1449.
Cullet P. Case Law Analysis - Monsanto v Schmeiser: A Landmark Decision Concerning Farmer Liability and Transgenic Contamination. Environmental Law 2005; 17(6): 83-97.
Ludlow K. Genetically Modified Organisms and Private Nuisance Liability. Tort Law Review 2005; 13(26): 92-108.
Julie A. Biotechnology’s Challenge to the Law of Torts. Mcgeorge Law Review 2000; 32(18): 221-224.
Flood C. Pollen Drift and Potential Cause of Action. Corp Law 2003; 474(12): 28-42.
Drew L. Legal Liability Issues in Agricultural Biotechnology. Crop Science 2004; 44(2): 456-463.
Christopher P. Liability for the Release of GMOs into the Environment: Exploring the Boundaries of Nuisance. The Cambridge Law Journal 2003; 62(2): 371-492.
Heald Paul J, Smith JC. The Problem of Social Cost in a Genetically Modified Age. Hastings Law Journal 2006; 58(1):87-152.
Witting C. Physical Damage in Negligence. Cambridge Law Journal 2002; 61(25): 189-201.
Salleh A, Organized Irresponsibility: Contradictions in the Australian Government’s Strategy for GM Regulation. Environmental Policy 2006; 15(399): 408-419.
Gary T. Tort Law and the Economy in Nineteenth-Century America: A Reinterpretation. Yale University Law Journal 1981; 90(12): 17-19.
Havemann P. Genetic Modification, Ecological Good Governance and the Law: New Zealand in the Age of Risk. James Cook University Law Review 2003; 10(9): 7-15.
Stauch M. Risk and Remoteness of Damage in Negligence. Modern Law Review 2001; 64(8): 191-204.
Perry R. The Economic Bias in Tort Law. University of Illinois Law Review 2008; 5(12): 573-583.
- چکیده مشاهده شده: 159 بار
- PDF دانلود شده: 79 بار