More Faust than Frankenstein: the European debate about the precautionary principle and risk regulation for genetically modified crops

By J. Tait. 2001

129 citations recorded by the source corpus.

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

Multinational corporations’ economic and human rights impacts on developing countries: a review and research agenda (2014, background): “For an example, see Tait (2001). x The primary industries (mining, oil extraction, refining) are classified by the OECD as medium-low technology industries (Hatzichronoglou, 1997). xi EPZ are typically (but not exclusively) associated with efficiency-seeking strategies, because EPZ respond to…”
Wrestling with uncertain risks: EU regulation of GMOs and the uncertainty paradox (2008, background): “In view of the societal and political controversies in Europe pertaining to genetic modification (e.g., Durant, Bauer, and Gaskell 1998; Gaskell et al. 2000, 2004; Horlick-Jones et al. 2007; Jasanoff 2005; Levidow 2001; Levidow, Carr, and Wield 2000, 2005; Levidow, Murphy, and Carr 2007; Tait 2001; ”
The Construction of Imaginaries of the Public as a Threat to Synthetic Biology (2015, background): “Good Versus Bad NGOs Analysing the GM crops debate in 2001, Tait categorised motivations of stakeholders along two dimensions: ‘interest-based’ and ‘value-based’ (Tait, 2001).”
Informal logics of risk: contingency and modes of practical reasoning (2005, background): “In her insightful analysis of the regulatory politics of a controversial technology (genetically modified crops), Tait (2001) has drawn what she sees as a crucial distinction between interest-based, and ethical or value-based, responses to risk issues.”