Agricultural Biotechnology: Legal Liability Regimes from Comparative and International Perspectives
Identifieur interne : 001357 ( Istex/Corpus ); précédent : 001356; suivant : 001358Agricultural Biotechnology: Legal Liability Regimes from Comparative and International Perspectives
Auteurs : Stuart J. Smyth ; Drew L. KershenSource :
- Global Jurist Advances [ 1535-1661 ] ; 2006-10-25.
Abstract
As agricultural biotechnology has become an agronomic alternative, discussion has emerged about what legal liabilities, if any, exists for those who create, distribute, and produce transgenic seeds and crops. Many governments have debated legal liability as related to agricultural biotechnology. In this article, the authors offer fresh insights on legal liability from comparative law and international law perspectives. The article begins by comparing Canadian and American legal liability regimes in agricultural biotechnology. Using this North American comparison as background, the article then discusses liability issues by contrasting the statutory regimes from Denmark and Germany. Once the comparisons and contrasts between Canadian, American, Danish, and German law have been presented, the article focuses on the on-going discussion of legal liability and agricultural biotechnology at the Meeting of the Parties (MOP) of the Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety (BSP). The authors posit that understanding the comparisons and contrasts between Canada, the United States, Denmark, and Germany assists greatly in understanding the issues and debates about legal liability and agricultural biotechnology at the international level in the BSP negotiations.
Url:
DOI: 10.2202/1535-1661.1205
Links to Exploration step
ISTEX:4674F37EF02C651C2EACBA83DD5F6B9FCCA77B33Le document en format XML
<record><TEI wicri:istexFullTextTei="biblStruct"><teiHeader><fileDesc><titleStmt><title xml:lang="en">Agricultural Biotechnology: Legal Liability Regimes from Comparative and International Perspectives</title><author><name sortKey="Smyth, Stuart J" sort="Smyth, Stuart J" uniqKey="Smyth S" first="Stuart J." last="Smyth">Stuart J. Smyth</name><affiliation><mods:affiliation>University of Saskatchewan, sjs064@mail.usask.ca</mods:affiliation></affiliation><affiliation><mods:affiliation>E-mail: sjs064@mail.usask.ca</mods:affiliation></affiliation></author><author><name sortKey="Kershen, Drew L" sort="Kershen, Drew L" uniqKey="Kershen D" first="Drew L." last="Kershen">Drew L. Kershen</name><affiliation><mods:affiliation>University of Oklahoma College of Law, dkershen@ou.edu</mods:affiliation></affiliation><affiliation><mods:affiliation>E-mail: dkershen@ou.edu</mods:affiliation></affiliation></author></titleStmt><publicationStmt><idno type="wicri:source">ISTEX</idno><idno type="RBID">ISTEX:4674F37EF02C651C2EACBA83DD5F6B9FCCA77B33</idno><date when="2006" year="2006">2006</date><idno type="doi">10.2202/1535-1661.1205</idno><idno type="url">https://api.istex.fr/document/4674F37EF02C651C2EACBA83DD5F6B9FCCA77B33/fulltext/pdf</idno><idno type="wicri:Area/Istex/Corpus">001357</idno><idno type="wicri:explorRef" wicri:stream="Istex" wicri:step="Corpus" wicri:corpus="ISTEX">001357</idno></publicationStmt><sourceDesc><biblStruct><analytic><title level="a" type="main" xml:lang="en">Agricultural Biotechnology: Legal Liability Regimes from Comparative and International Perspectives</title><author><name sortKey="Smyth, Stuart J" sort="Smyth, Stuart J" uniqKey="Smyth S" first="Stuart J." last="Smyth">Stuart J. Smyth</name><affiliation><mods:affiliation>University of Saskatchewan, sjs064@mail.usask.ca</mods:affiliation></affiliation><affiliation><mods:affiliation>E-mail: sjs064@mail.usask.ca</mods:affiliation></affiliation></author><author><name sortKey="Kershen, Drew L" sort="Kershen, Drew L" uniqKey="Kershen D" first="Drew L." last="Kershen">Drew L. Kershen</name><affiliation><mods:affiliation>University of Oklahoma College of Law, dkershen@ou.edu</mods:affiliation></affiliation><affiliation><mods:affiliation>E-mail: dkershen@ou.edu</mods:affiliation></affiliation></author></analytic><monogr></monogr><series><title level="j">Global Jurist Advances</title><idno type="eISSN">1535-1661</idno><imprint><publisher>De Gruyter</publisher><date type="published" when="2006-10-25">2006-10-25</date><biblScope unit="volume">6</biblScope><biblScope unit="issue">2</biblScope></imprint></series><idno type="istex">4674F37EF02C651C2EACBA83DD5F6B9FCCA77B33</idno><idno type="DOI">10.2202/1535-1661.1205</idno><idno type="ArticleID">1535-1661.1205</idno><idno type="pdf">gj.2006.6.2.1205.pdf</idno></biblStruct></sourceDesc></fileDesc><profileDesc><textClass></textClass><langUsage><language ident="en">en</language></langUsage></profileDesc></teiHeader><front><div type="abstract" xml:lang="en">As agricultural biotechnology has become an agronomic alternative, discussion has emerged about what legal liabilities, if any, exists for those who create, distribute, and produce transgenic seeds and crops. Many governments have debated legal liability as related to agricultural biotechnology. In this article, the authors offer fresh insights on legal liability from comparative law and international law perspectives. The article begins by comparing Canadian and American legal liability regimes in agricultural biotechnology. Using this North American comparison as background, the article then discusses liability issues by contrasting the statutory regimes from Denmark and Germany. Once the comparisons and contrasts between Canadian, American, Danish, and German law have been presented, the article focuses on the on-going discussion of legal liability and agricultural biotechnology at the Meeting of the Parties (MOP) of the Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety (BSP). The authors posit that understanding the comparisons and contrasts between Canada, the United States, Denmark, and Germany assists greatly in understanding the issues and debates about legal liability and agricultural biotechnology at the international level in the BSP negotiations.</div></front></TEI><istex><corpusName>degruyter-journals</corpusName><author><json:item><name>Stuart J. Smyth</name><affiliations><json:string>University of Saskatchewan, sjs064@mail.usask.ca</json:string><json:string>E-mail: sjs064@mail.usask.ca</json:string></affiliations></json:item><json:item><name>Drew L. Kershen</name><affiliations><json:string>University of Oklahoma College of Law, dkershen@ou.edu</json:string><json:string>E-mail: dkershen@ou.edu</json:string></affiliations></json:item></author><subject><json:item><lang><json:string>eng</json:string></lang><value>environmental law</value></json:item><json:item><lang><json:string>eng</json:string></lang><value>legal liability</value></json:item><json:item><lang><json:string>eng</json:string></lang><value>agricultural biotechnology</value></json:item><json:item><lang><json:string>eng</json:string></lang><value>legal liability</value></json:item><json:item><lang><json:string>eng</json:string></lang><value>Canada</value></json:item><json:item><lang><json:string>eng</json:string></lang><value>Denmark</value></json:item><json:item><lang><json:string>eng</json:string></lang><value>Germany</value></json:item><json:item><lang><json:string>eng</json:string></lang><value>United States of America</value></json:item><json:item><lang><json:string>eng</json:string></lang><value>Cartagena Biosasfety Protocol</value></json:item></subject><articleId><json:string>1535-1661.1205</json:string></articleId><language><json:string>eng</json:string></language><originalGenre><json:string>research-article</json:string></originalGenre><abstract>As agricultural biotechnology has become an agronomic alternative, discussion has emerged about what legal liabilities, if any, exists for those who create, distribute, and produce transgenic seeds and crops. Many governments have debated legal liability as related to agricultural biotechnology. In this article, the authors offer fresh insights on legal liability from comparative law and international law perspectives. The article begins by comparing Canadian and American legal liability regimes in agricultural biotechnology. Using this North American comparison as background, the article then discusses liability issues by contrasting the statutory regimes from Denmark and Germany. Once the comparisons and contrasts between Canadian, American, Danish, and German law have been presented, the article focuses on the on-going discussion of legal liability and agricultural biotechnology at the Meeting of the Parties (MOP) of the Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety (BSP). The authors posit that understanding the comparisons and contrasts between Canada, the United States, Denmark, and Germany assists greatly in understanding the issues and debates about legal liability and agricultural biotechnology at the international level in the BSP negotiations.</abstract><qualityIndicators><score>9.1</score><pdfVersion>1.4</pdfVersion><pdfPageSize>612 x 792 pts (letter)</pdfPageSize><refBibsNative>false</refBibsNative><keywordCount>9</keywordCount><abstractCharCount>1260</abstractCharCount><pdfWordCount>32313</pdfWordCount><pdfCharCount>202846</pdfCharCount><pdfPageCount>80</pdfPageCount><abstractWordCount>175</abstractWordCount></qualityIndicators><title>Agricultural Biotechnology: Legal Liability Regimes from Comparative and International Perspectives</title><genre><json:string>research-article</json:string></genre><host><volume>6</volume><publisherId><json:string>gj</json:string></publisherId><issue>2</issue><genre><json:string>journal</json:string></genre><language><json:string>unknown</json:string></language><eissn><json:string>1535-1661</json:string></eissn><title>Global Jurist Advances</title></host><publicationDate>2006</publicationDate><copyrightDate>2006</copyrightDate><doi><json:string>10.2202/1535-1661.1205</json:string></doi><id>4674F37EF02C651C2EACBA83DD5F6B9FCCA77B33</id><score>0.057594012</score><fulltext><json:item><extension>pdf</extension><original>true</original><mimetype>application/pdf</mimetype><uri>https://api.istex.fr/document/4674F37EF02C651C2EACBA83DD5F6B9FCCA77B33/fulltext/pdf</uri></json:item><json:item><extension>zip</extension><original>false</original><mimetype>application/zip</mimetype><uri>https://api.istex.fr/document/4674F37EF02C651C2EACBA83DD5F6B9FCCA77B33/fulltext/zip</uri></json:item><istex:fulltextTEI uri="https://api.istex.fr/document/4674F37EF02C651C2EACBA83DD5F6B9FCCA77B33/fulltext/tei"><teiHeader><fileDesc><titleStmt><title level="a" type="main" xml:lang="en">Agricultural Biotechnology: Legal Liability Regimes from Comparative and International Perspectives</title><respStmt><resp>Références bibliographiques récupérées via GROBID</resp><name resp="ISTEX-API">ISTEX-API (INIST-CNRS)</name></respStmt></titleStmt><publicationStmt><authority>ISTEX</authority><publisher>De Gruyter</publisher><availability><p>©2011 Walter de Gruyter GmbH & Co. KG, Berlin/Boston</p></availability><date>2006-10-25</date></publicationStmt><sourceDesc><biblStruct type="inbook"><analytic><title level="a" type="main" xml:lang="en">Agricultural Biotechnology: Legal Liability Regimes from Comparative and International Perspectives</title><author xml:id="author-1"><persName><forename type="first">Stuart J.</forename><surname>Smyth</surname></persName><email>sjs064@mail.usask.ca</email><affiliation>University of Saskatchewan, sjs064@mail.usask.ca</affiliation></author><author xml:id="author-2"><persName><forename type="first">Drew L.</forename><surname>Kershen</surname></persName><email>dkershen@ou.edu</email><affiliation>University of Oklahoma College of Law, dkershen@ou.edu</affiliation></author></analytic><monogr><title level="j">Global Jurist Advances</title><idno type="eISSN">1535-1661</idno><imprint><publisher>De Gruyter</publisher><date type="published" when="2006-10-25"></date><biblScope unit="volume">6</biblScope><biblScope unit="issue">2</biblScope></imprint></monogr><idno type="istex">4674F37EF02C651C2EACBA83DD5F6B9FCCA77B33</idno><idno type="DOI">10.2202/1535-1661.1205</idno><idno type="ArticleID">1535-1661.1205</idno><idno type="pdf">gj.2006.6.2.1205.pdf</idno></biblStruct></sourceDesc></fileDesc><profileDesc><creation><date>2006-10-25</date></creation><langUsage><language ident="en">en</language></langUsage><abstract xml:lang="en"><p>As agricultural biotechnology has become an agronomic alternative, discussion has emerged about what legal liabilities, if any, exists for those who create, distribute, and produce transgenic seeds and crops. Many governments have debated legal liability as related to agricultural biotechnology. In this article, the authors offer fresh insights on legal liability from comparative law and international law perspectives. The article begins by comparing Canadian and American legal liability regimes in agricultural biotechnology. Using this North American comparison as background, the article then discusses liability issues by contrasting the statutory regimes from Denmark and Germany. Once the comparisons and contrasts between Canadian, American, Danish, and German law have been presented, the article focuses on the on-going discussion of legal liability and agricultural biotechnology at the Meeting of the Parties (MOP) of the Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety (BSP). The authors posit that understanding the comparisons and contrasts between Canada, the United States, Denmark, and Germany assists greatly in understanding the issues and debates about legal liability and agricultural biotechnology at the international level in the BSP negotiations.</p></abstract><textClass><keywords scheme="keyword"><list><item><term>environmental law</term></item><item><term>legal liability</term></item></list></keywords></textClass><textClass><keywords scheme="keyword"><list><head>Keywords</head><item><term>agricultural biotechnology</term></item><item><term>legal liability</term></item><item><term>Canada</term></item><item><term>Denmark</term></item><item><term>Germany</term></item><item><term>United States of America</term></item><item><term>Cartagena Biosasfety Protocol</term></item></list></keywords></textClass></profileDesc><revisionDesc><change when="2006-10-25">Created</change><change when="2006-10-25">Published</change><change xml:id="refBibs-istex" who="#ISTEX-API" when="2017-01-17">References added</change></revisionDesc></teiHeader></istex:fulltextTEI><json:item><extension>txt</extension><original>false</original><mimetype>text/plain</mimetype><uri>https://api.istex.fr/document/4674F37EF02C651C2EACBA83DD5F6B9FCCA77B33/fulltext/txt</uri></json:item></fulltext><metadata><istex:metadataXml wicri:clean="corpus degruyter-journals" wicri:toSee="no header"><istex:xmlDeclaration>version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"</istex:xmlDeclaration><istex:docType PUBLIC="-//Atypon//DTD Atypon Systems Journal Archiving and Interchange NLM DTD v3.0.2 20101108//EN" URI="atypon_archive-interchange-dtd-3.0.2/atypon-archivearticle3.dtd" name="istex:docType"></istex:docType><istex:document><article article-type="research-article" dtd-version="3.0" xml:lang="EN"><front><journal-meta><journal-id journal-id-type="publisher-id">gj</journal-id><journal-title-group><journal-title>Global Jurist Advances</journal-title></journal-title-group><issn pub-type="epub">1535-1661</issn><publisher><publisher-name>De Gruyter</publisher-name></publisher></journal-meta><article-meta><article-id pub-id-type="publisher-id">1535-1661.1205</article-id><article-id pub-id-type="doi">10.2202/1535-1661.1205</article-id><article-categories><subj-group subj-group-type="heading"><subject>Advances Article</subject></subj-group><subj-group><subject>environmental law</subject><subject>legal liability</subject></subj-group></article-categories><title-group><article-title>Agricultural Biotechnology: Legal Liability Regimes from Comparative and International Perspectives</article-title></title-group><contrib-group><contrib contrib-type="author"><name><surname>Smyth</surname><given-names>Stuart J.</given-names></name><xref ref-type="aff" rid="a1"><sup>1</sup></xref><aff id="a1"><sup>1</sup>University of Saskatchewan, <email xlink:href="mailto:sjs064@mail.usask.ca">sjs064@mail.usask.ca</email></aff></contrib><contrib contrib-type="author"><name><surname>Kershen</surname><given-names>Drew L.</given-names></name><xref ref-type="aff" rid="a2"><sup>2</sup></xref><aff id="a2"><sup>2</sup>University of Oklahoma College of Law, <email xlink:href="mailto:dkershen@ou.edu">dkershen@ou.edu</email></aff></contrib></contrib-group><pub-date pub-type="epub"><day>25</day><month>10</month><year>2006</year></pub-date><volume>6</volume><issue>2</issue><permissions><copyright-statement>©2011 Walter de Gruyter GmbH & Co. KG, Berlin/Boston</copyright-statement><copyright-year>2011</copyright-year></permissions><related-article related-article-type="pdf" xlink:href="gj.2006.6.2.1205.pdf"></related-article><abstract><p>As agricultural biotechnology has become an agronomic alternative, discussion has emerged about what legal liabilities, if any, exists for those who create, distribute, and produce transgenic seeds and crops. Many governments have debated legal liability as related to agricultural biotechnology. In this article, the authors offer fresh insights on legal liability from comparative law and international law perspectives. The article begins by comparing Canadian and American legal liability regimes in agricultural biotechnology. Using this North American comparison as background, the article then discusses liability issues by contrasting the statutory regimes from Denmark and Germany. Once the comparisons and contrasts between Canadian, American, Danish, and German law have been presented, the article focuses on the on-going discussion of legal liability and agricultural biotechnology at the Meeting of the Parties (MOP) of the Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety (BSP). The authors posit that understanding the comparisons and contrasts between Canada, the United States, Denmark, and Germany assists greatly in understanding the issues and debates about legal liability and agricultural biotechnology at the international level in the BSP negotiations.</p></abstract><kwd-group><title>Keywords</title><kwd>agricultural biotechnology</kwd><x>, </x><kwd>legal liability</kwd><x>, </x><kwd>Canada</kwd><x>, </x><kwd>Denmark</kwd><x>, </x><kwd>Germany</kwd><x>, </x><kwd>United States of America</kwd><x>, </x><kwd>Cartagena Biosasfety Protocol</kwd></kwd-group><counts><page-count count="80"></page-count></counts></article-meta></front></article></istex:document></istex:metadataXml><mods version="3.6"><titleInfo lang="en"><title>Agricultural Biotechnology: Legal Liability Regimes from Comparative and International Perspectives</title></titleInfo><titleInfo type="alternative" lang="en" contentType="CDATA"><title>Agricultural Biotechnology: Legal Liability Regimes from Comparative and International Perspectives</title></titleInfo><name type="personal"><namePart type="given">Stuart J.</namePart><namePart type="family">Smyth</namePart><affiliation>University of Saskatchewan, sjs064@mail.usask.ca</affiliation><affiliation>E-mail: sjs064@mail.usask.ca</affiliation><role><roleTerm type="text">author</roleTerm></role></name><name type="personal"><namePart type="given">Drew L.</namePart><namePart type="family">Kershen</namePart><affiliation>University of Oklahoma College of Law, dkershen@ou.edu</affiliation><affiliation>E-mail: dkershen@ou.edu</affiliation><role><roleTerm type="text">author</roleTerm></role></name><typeOfResource>text</typeOfResource><genre type="research-article" displayLabel="research-article"></genre><subject><topic>environmental law</topic><topic>legal liability</topic></subject><originInfo><publisher>De Gruyter</publisher><dateIssued encoding="w3cdtf">2006-10-25</dateIssued><dateCreated encoding="w3cdtf">2006-10-25</dateCreated><copyrightDate encoding="w3cdtf">2006</copyrightDate></originInfo><language><languageTerm type="code" authority="iso639-2b">eng</languageTerm><languageTerm type="code" authority="rfc3066">en</languageTerm></language><physicalDescription><internetMediaType>text/html</internetMediaType></physicalDescription><abstract lang="en">As agricultural biotechnology has become an agronomic alternative, discussion has emerged about what legal liabilities, if any, exists for those who create, distribute, and produce transgenic seeds and crops. Many governments have debated legal liability as related to agricultural biotechnology. In this article, the authors offer fresh insights on legal liability from comparative law and international law perspectives. The article begins by comparing Canadian and American legal liability regimes in agricultural biotechnology. Using this North American comparison as background, the article then discusses liability issues by contrasting the statutory regimes from Denmark and Germany. Once the comparisons and contrasts between Canadian, American, Danish, and German law have been presented, the article focuses on the on-going discussion of legal liability and agricultural biotechnology at the Meeting of the Parties (MOP) of the Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety (BSP). The authors posit that understanding the comparisons and contrasts between Canada, the United States, Denmark, and Germany assists greatly in understanding the issues and debates about legal liability and agricultural biotechnology at the international level in the BSP negotiations.</abstract><subject><genre>Keywords</genre><topic>agricultural biotechnology</topic><topic>legal liability</topic><topic>Canada</topic><topic>Denmark</topic><topic>Germany</topic><topic>United States of America</topic><topic>Cartagena Biosasfety Protocol</topic></subject><relatedItem type="host"><titleInfo><title>Global Jurist Advances</title></titleInfo><genre type="journal">journal</genre><identifier type="eISSN">1535-1661</identifier><identifier type="PublisherID">gj</identifier><part><date>2006</date><detail type="volume"><caption>vol.</caption><number>6</number></detail><detail type="issue"><caption>no.</caption><number>2</number></detail><extent unit="pages"><total>80</total></extent></part></relatedItem><identifier type="istex">4674F37EF02C651C2EACBA83DD5F6B9FCCA77B33</identifier><identifier type="DOI">10.2202/1535-1661.1205</identifier><identifier type="ArticleID">1535-1661.1205</identifier><identifier type="pdf">gj.2006.6.2.1205.pdf</identifier><accessCondition type="use and reproduction" contentType="copyright">©2011 Walter de Gruyter GmbH & Co. KG, Berlin/Boston</accessCondition><recordInfo><recordContentSource>De Gruyter</recordContentSource></recordInfo></mods></metadata><serie></serie></istex></record>Pour manipuler ce document sous Unix (Dilib)
EXPLOR_STEP=$WICRI_ROOT/Wicri/Agronomie/explor/SisAgriV1/Data/Istex/Corpus
HfdSelect -h $EXPLOR_STEP/biblio.hfd -nk 001357 | SxmlIndent | more
Ou
HfdSelect -h $EXPLOR_AREA/Data/Istex/Corpus/biblio.hfd -nk 001357 | SxmlIndent | more
Pour mettre un lien sur cette page dans le réseau Wicri
{{Explor lien
|wiki= Wicri/Agronomie
|area= SisAgriV1
|flux= Istex
|étape= Corpus
|type= RBID
|clé= ISTEX:4674F37EF02C651C2EACBA83DD5F6B9FCCA77B33
|texte= Agricultural Biotechnology: Legal Liability Regimes from Comparative and International Perspectives
}}
| This area was generated with Dilib version V0.6.28. |  |