Analysis of Public
Submissions
Analysis of
Public Submissions
3.
section 3.11 |
appendix 3
Outcomes of Consultation: Submissions
from the Public
Section contents
3.
Analysis of Public Submissions
22
3.11 Global developments
91
Background
91
Outline of this section
91
Partnership with nature
91
Economic globalisation
92
Biotechnology revolution
92
Consumer responses to genetic modification
92
Legal and policy responses to genetic modification
93
Report Appendix 3 | Royal Commission on Genetic Modification
Section 3: Public Submissions
| H1 | p91
Royal Commission on Genetic Modification | Report Appendix 3
3.11 Global developments
Background
The Warrant, under item (h) focuses on the global context in which New Zealand
genetic modification activities occur or may occur. It called for information on:
the global developments and issues that may influence the manner in which New Zealand
may use, or limit the use of, genetic modification, genetically modified organisms and
products
In responding to this request for information, submitters looked to the global
trends that are influencing, or are likely to influence in the future, genetic
modification activities and people's responses to them. Thus, they reflected on
trends such as a shift from human dominion over nature to partnership, the
globalisation of the economy, the biotechnology revolution, consumer responses
to genetic modification, increasing recognition of indigenous rights and legal
responses to genetic modification.
Outline of this section
This section discussed submitters' views under five main headings:
*
partnership with nature
*
economic globalisation
*
biotechnology revolution
*
consumer responses to genetic modification
*
legal responses to genetic modification
Partnership with nature
Some public submitters argued that a rethink was needed about the way humans
exploit nature. A switch to sustainable (usually organic) agricultural methods was
seen as a first step towards shifting from people claiming their right to have
dominion over nature to working with nature. This push to a "partnership with
nature" was seen as a global trend rapidly gaining ground, whereas genetic
modification was seen as a continuation of the polluting "domination of nature"
Section 3: Public Submissions
| H1 | p91
Royal Commission on Genetic Modification | Report Appendix 3
p92 |
Section 3: Public Submissions
Report Appendix 3 | Roy al Commission on Genetic M odification
approach that many submitters identified as the greatest threat to global
environmental health.
Often public submitters explicitly rejected the argument that environmental
resource pressures justified genetic modification. Many submitters believed there
was more than enough food in the world to feed the growing population. Food
supply problems were viewed as distribution problems resulting from corruption,
war, and lack of moral initiative on the part of developed countries. Many
submitters viewed other apparent resource problems as the justifications of pro-
genetic modification spokespeople (loss of arable land, pollution, and pests) and
indicative of problems stemming from "the way we have been doing things" since
the Green Revolution.
Economic globalisation
Public submitters often explicitly identified globalisation as a bad trend and one
that has resulted in increased foreign ownership of New Zealand. They attributed
this globalisation to the actions of multinational companies, and saw them as the
only beneficiaries. Some submitters wanted New Zealand to push for greater self-
sufficiency as a way of breaking away from the control of these multinationals.
There was some confusion on the issue however, as many submitters who
identified globalisation as explicitly a bad thing, also viewed it implicitly as a good
thing in that they wanted New Zealand to be able to sell its non-genetic
modification products to the rest of the world.
Biotechnology revolution
Although a small number of public submitters were excited about the possibilities
of the biotechnological revolution, more often they expressed concern. For
instance, some submitters expressed abhorrence of genomics, often seeing it as
ethically dubious, driven by short-term commercial interest, and risky. A few
instead preferred to see New Zealand avoid this technology, concentrating instead
on "more natural" research related to organic production.
Consumer responses to genetic modification
Public submitters identified consumer-related overseas developments that could
affect how New Zealand addresses genetic modification. These developments,
which are not necessary mutually consistent included:
*
consumer concern about genetic modification, especially for food products
Section 3: Public Submissions
| H1 | p93
Royal Commission on Genetic Modification | Report Appendix 3
*
consumer demand for "clean, green", "safe" and "natural" products
*
decreasing demand for genetic modification-free products
*
increasing demand for organic.
Submitters viewed these trends as, together, signalling the need for New Zealand
to reject genetic modification and embrace organic production.
Legal and policy responses to genetic
modification
Some public submitters were concerned about the lack of public input into
Government's negotiation of trade and other agreements with international
partners. They were also concerned about the degree to which these agreements
could influence the way New Zealand made decisions about genetic modification.
They saw any international pressure on New Zealand as a sovereignty issue and an
unacceptable challenge to national self-determination. Thus, public submitters
considered that international agreements needed to be renegotiated, so that they
reflect public views about genetic modification. Also, rather than ensuring that
New Zealand's legislative and regulatory framework is consistent with international
frameworks, they were more likely to argue for New Zealand's taking a maverick
position as the country has in other ethical matters, such as in nuclear matters.
Thus, they saw some value in New Zealand clearly standing out from other
countries.