• Food Science and Industry
• /
• v.52 no.2
• /
• pp.140-152
• /
• 2019

"Contained use" means using LMOs during manufacturing processes within a facility, equipment or other physical structures to prevent the spread of LMOs to the external environment. LMOs and their substances not only have played an essential role in various industries in different ways, but also have made to spread concerns in Biosafety widely. In Korea, the LMO Act is to implement the Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety' since 1st Jan 2008. This is focused on Biosafety and Risk management for LMOs according to the precautionary principle.

• Journal of Environmental Policy
• /
• v.2 no.1
• /
• pp.107-135
• /
• 2003

This study reviews the proposed liability and redress regime under the Cartagena Protocol on Biodiversity. Several core elements for the regime are discussed in comparison with those listed in the 1999 Basel Protocol on Liability and Compensation for Damage resulting from the Transboundary Movements of Hazardous Wastes and their Disposal. These are (1) scope of the rules and procedures; (2) channeling of liability; (3) legal standing; (4) definition of damage; (5) standard of care; (6) ancillary sources of compensation; (7) limitation of liability; (8) financial guarantees; and (9) mutual recognition and enforcement of judgments. Korea has given relatively little attention to the issue of liability and redress in the context of LMOs trade. As the Protocol is expected to enter into force soon, Korea needs to develop appropriate implementing domestic mechanisms for the Biosafety Protocol. Establishing an adequate domestic liability and compensation scheme will be one of the most important mechanisms not only to comply the Protocol but to ensure safety of LMOs in general. A further research is needed on the basis of a comparision of relevant legislations in different countries as well as analysis of current laws related to the accidents arising from LMOs trade, such as product liability laws, food safety laws, liability provisions in some environmental legislations.

• Journal of Plant Biotechnology
• /
• v.5 no.1
• /
• pp.13-17
• /
• 2003

Biotechnology is certainly one of the major landmarks in the 20th century history of science. It may produce enormous utility to human beings, but at the same time, it carries huge potential risks to the environment and public health. Thus, with a view to securing safety for the environment and public health in relation to the development and use of living modified organisms (LMOs), the Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety was adopted, in which a regulation Procedure as to the transboundary movements, transportation, handling, and use of LMOs were drawn up. In order to prepare for the entry into force of the Protocol, the Republic of Korea legislated the "Act on the Transboundary Movements of living modified organisms(hereinafter referred as the 'Act')" in Mar 2001, and has pre-announced the enactments of the enforcement ordinance and the enforcement regulation to the Act. Pursuant to the Act, the Ministry of Commerce, Industry and Energy, as a Competent National Authority, is making efforts to implement domestic biosafety schemes in cooperation with other bio-related government ministries. In order for these efforts to reap fruits, industry, academia, and research institutions should cooperate with one another, and civic groups and NGOs should narrow the differences in opinions and timely respond to the fast-changing situations. Focusing on the precautionary principle, the Protocol puts a great emphasis on the importance of information sharing amongst countries, and the Act also follows this principle. In order to gurantee biosafety, countries around the world, including the ROK, agreed to establish National Biosafety Clearing, designed to provide the information on the export/import of LMOs, R'||'&'||'Ds, risk assessment, safety control, etc. and register it on the CBD Central Biosafety Clearing House.e.

• Toxicological Research
• /
• v.19 no.1
• /
• pp.1-12
• /
• 2003

New breeding method by genetic engineering is expected as a key technology to solve food shortage due to the growing world population in the year 2000s. Many genetically modified organisms (GMOs) were already developed and the commercial cultivation had started. The first GMO, Flavr Savr tomato, which rotted at a much slower pace than ordinary ones, was developed in US in 1994. Since then, over than 70 different agricultural products including corn, cotton, soybean, papaya, potato, and squash made with genetically modified plants are reportedly on sale worldwide. Supporters favor the GMOs because they have greater yields, longer shelf lives and stronger resistance to disease and insects. On the other hand, opponents say that the supporters ignore a potential danger that they may damage the environment as well as human beings. To assure the safe development and use of GMOs as food and other biotech products, the possible risks on biological environment and human health should be throughly examined and regulated by developer and government. Because the biosafety problem is a global, environmental, and trade issue, a new international treaty is under development. The Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety was adopted at the 1 st Extraordinary Conference of Parties of the Convention on Biological Diversity which was held at Mont-real, Canada, Jan. 29th, 2000. The adoption of the Protocol is seen as a breakthrough in that it is based on the" Precautionary Principle" despite scientific uncertainties surrounding potential risks that GMOs may inflict on human health and the environment and that it has laid the ground for introduction of specific steps to handle international trading of GMOs. In this paper, the authors would like to introduce the current status and perspective of environmental and human risk assessment of GMOs.t of GMOs.

• Journal of Applied Biological Chemistry
• /
• v.61 no.4
• /
• pp.305-314
• /
• 2018

'New Breeding Techniques (NBTs)' have been one of hot issues, since their future will be affected profoundly by national as well as international regulatory landscapes. In this review, we compare characteristics of NBTs with conventional and genetic modification, and analyze genetically modified organism (GMO) regulatory systems in the context of possible regulation of NBTs. NBTs are very heterogeneous in terms of principles, methodologies, and final products. As Living Modified Organisms (LMO) is defined in the Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety (CPB) as an organism containing novel combination of genetic materials obtained by the use of modern biotechnology, CPB as well as other national legislations locate itself somewhere in the middle between product-based and process-based regulations. It is also noted that jurisdictions with regulatory systems more oriented to product-based one tend to be more productive and decide or may decide to exempt site-directed nucleases-1 from GMO regulation. In this context, Korean legislations are reviewed to clarify the commons and differences in GMO definitions. Act on Transboundary Movement of LMO Act, Food Sanitation Act and Agricultural and Fishery Products Quality Control Act are three major acts to regulate GMOs. It is noted that there are differences in the definition of LMO or GM food/products especially between the LMO Act and the Food Sanitation Act. Such differences may cause conflicts between Acts when policy-decision regarding the regulation of NBTs is made. Therefore, it is necessary to reorganize legislations before policies regarding the regulation of any techniques from biotechnology are made.

• Environmental and Resource Economics Review
• /
• v.13 no.3
• /
• pp.519-547
• /
• 2004

This paper analyze problems about scope of specific trade obligations(STOs), principle of dispute settlement procedure, and non-parties in context of the Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety(POB), which based on sub-paragraph 31(i) of DDA WTO Ministrial Declaration. The implications based on result of this study are as follows. First, to accept the wider scope of STOs under POB in Korea, importing country, won't be harmful to LMOs and Bioindustry. Instead, it will ensure a high level of biosafety concerning the import of LMOs. Exporters can take different kinds of trade measures to countervail adverse effect on the export of LMOs in this case. Therefore importer will endure the aftereffect. However, if korea were in exporter's place, to accept the wider scope STOs under POB will not have a good influence on the export of LMOs. Korea, therefore, should devise scheme for responding to debate about the STOs in MEAs, which have to be based on cost-benefit analysis and scenarios taking into account of speed and level in biotechology progress, status and trend of LMOs R&D and production, and condition of other industries. Second, it is not easy to agree with applying to what's rule between the POB and WTO for settlement dispute. Because there is the incompatibility between the POB characterized according to social rationality and WTO's rules for safety and environmental protection characterized according to scientific rationality. This issue have to be discussed for long period due to gap like that. Accordingly Korea, one of major LMOs importing countries, should suggest continuously that the effort is needed to ensure an adequate level of protection in transboundary movements of LMOs and scientific, environmental and socio-economic study. Third, in case of dispute between party and non-party of the POB, the duties under the WTO of non-party of the POB(if WTO member country) is valid. The country, therefore, will try to settle dispute based on WTO's rules. However, international society have to ensure for sound and safe use of LMOs in the field of transboundary movements. Accordingly Korea should devise scheme for preventing the possibility of dispute between party and non-party of the POB(if WTO member country), which is supported by policy options under the POB.