ABSTRACT
In Chapters 2 and 3 we examined a range of arguments made by different transatlantic networks in relation to agricultural biotechnology. These chapters show that members of TABD, TACD and TAED often promoted incompatible frames as they argued over ‘approved once, accepted everywhere’, ‘right to know, right to choose’ and threats to sustainable agriculture. Their frames converged thematically, however, on the role of science in regulation. The Transatlantic Business Dialogue, for example, argued for the use of ‘sound science’ in assessing risks, whilst the Transatlantic Consumer Dialogue campaigned for the use of the ‘precautionary principle’. Members of the Transatlantic Environmental Dialogue went further and argued that producers of biotechnology products should be required to prove that they are safe. In Chapters 4 and 5 we focus on such links between science, risk assessment and regulation.
