Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorHoban, Thomas
dc.contributor.authorNolan, Canice
dc.contributor.authorBennett, Allan
dc.date.accessioned2017-06-07T17:49:27Z
dc.date.available2017-06-07T17:49:27Z
dc.date.issued2005
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/1813/51014
dc.description.abstractPanelists expressed highly critical opinions of industry, government and universities regarding agricultural biotechnology and its products, especially those from cloned animals and PMPs from food crops, identified the major problem in European acceptance of GM foods as the consumer not the regulators; food processors aren’t going to source when risk is commonly associated with GM, and described the Public Intellectual Property Resource for Agriculture (PIPRA) that hopes to provide bundles of proprietary technologies to allow the benefits of biotechnology to accrue to a broader base of crops and consumers and developing-country farmers.
dc.language.isoen_US
dc.publisherNABC
dc.rightsAttribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International*
dc.rights.urihttps://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/*
dc.subjectAgricultural biotechnology
dc.subjectenvironment, human health
dc.subjectGMO, genetic engineering, pharming
dc.subjectplant based vaccines
dc.subjectmedicinals
dc.subjectregulation
dc.subjectliability, patents
dc.subjectstewardship
dc.titlePanel discussion/ Q&A: Regulation, consumer acceptance, and risk management
dc.typebook chapter


Files in this item

Thumbnail

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record

Except where otherwise noted, this item's license is described as Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International

Statistics