New Zealand—GMO Rules and Regulations in New Zealand

Heinemann, Jack A.; Coray, Dorien S.; Kurenbach, Brigitta

doi:10.1007/978-3-030-53183-6_37

Cited by 1 publication

(1 citation statement)

References 7 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In addition, food safety is regulated by another body-Food Standards Australia New Zealand (FSANZ). This body makes decisions on food safety for both Australia and New Zealand (Heinemann et al 2020), leading to the ambiguous situation where a plant, not regulated in Australia but which would be in New Zealand, could be made into food not regulated in either country. Half of New Zealand's domestic food supply is imported, while it is also a major food exporter.…”

Section: North Americamentioning

confidence: 99%

Social Acceptability of Cisgenic Plants: Public Perception, Consumer Preferences, and Legal Regulation

Dayé

Spök

Allan

et al. 2023

Concepts and Strategies in Plant Sciences

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Part of the rationale behind the introduction of the term cisgenesis was the expectation that due to the “more natural” character of the genetic modification, cisgenic plants would be socially more acceptable than transgenic ones. This chapter assesses whether this expectation was justified. It thereby addresses three arenas of social acceptability: public perception, consumer preferences, and legal regulation. Discussing and comparing recent studies from four geographical areas across the globe—Europe, North America, Japan, and Australia and New Zealand—the chapter shows that the expectation was justified, and that cisgenic plants are treated as being more acceptable than other forms of genetic modification. Yet, there are considerable differences across the three arenas of social acceptability. In Australia, Canada, and the United States of America, the legal regulation of cisgenic plants is less restrictive than in Europe, Japan, and New Zealand. Also, the public perceptions are rather diverse across these countries, as are the factors that are deemed most influential in informing public opinion and consumer decisions. While people in North America appear to be most interested in individual benefits of the products (improved quality, health aspects), Europeans are more likely to accept cisgenic plants and derived products if they have a proven environmental benefit. In New Zealand, in contrast, the potential impact of cisgenic plants on other, more or less related markets, like meat export and tourism, is heavily debated. We conclude with some remarks about a possible new arrangement between science and policy that may come about with a new, or homogenized, international regulatory regime.

show abstract

Section: North Americamentioning

confidence: 99%