Many of the pro-GMO nations, such as the United States, were worried that the precautionary principle advocated by the Protocol would become “justification for arbitrary and nonscience-based import-restrictive actions” (Gupta, 2000, p. 29). Anti-GM organizations would counter this belief with the assertion that the US acts in its self-regard to spread the use of GMOs. While the argument that the United States acted in their own self-interests is valid, that does not justify the actions of the European Union or anti-GM nongovernmental organizations. Regardless of public statements of moral reasoning, the intervention of a country does not occur without at least a little bit of self-interest on the part of the intervener. The hidden agenda of …show more content…
Once the Cartagena Protocol is removed, negotiation for a better agreement can begin. Too many important GM research projects have been stalled by overly complicated regulatory processes and the intervention of anti-GM NGOs. While everyone agrees upon the fact that biotechnology must be supervised, there is contention over how much regulation is needed. Where the Cartagena Protocol erred on the side of way to cautious, a new agreement that would address the issue in a more reasonable manner would help the region greatly. This new agreement would keep most of the clauses that resolved the concerns of the LDCs, such as it being mandatory to seek the consent of the host country before commencing on GMO research. A significant change will be seen in the approach towards GMO regulation and approval. The improved agreement will end the basis on the precautionary principle, which served as the backbone for most of the Cartagena Protocol’s arguments. The focus will be more on experiments and research done on the safety of GMOs instead of on the pseudoscience taught by ‘well-meaning’ NGOs. Individual countries should have greater command over their own countries than the dominating and often interfering Western powers do. Each country must be able to craft its own policy towards GMOs without the manipulation of countries that deem themselves more advanced. Only by letting countries cultivate their respective GMO policies will they be able to become less dependent upon foreign intelligence and more knowledgeable and therefore protected against misinformation. This can be furthered through clauses that create, within each of the countries, scientific academies that will have extensive knowledge about GMOs (among other scientific topics) and their potential dangers. This agreement must be tailored to the specific needs of
Trade is the most common form of transferring ownership of a product. The concepts are very simple, I give you something (a good or service) and you give me something (a good or service) in return, everyone is happy. However, trade is not limited to two individuals. There are trades that happen outside national borders and we refer to that as international trading. Before a country does international trading, they do research to understand the opportunity costs and marginal costs of their production versus another countries production. Doing this we can increase profit, decrease costs and improve overall trade efficiency. Currently, there are negotiations going on between 11 countries about making a trade agreement called the Trans-Pacific
The duties and responsibilities of the fire department are most importantly responding to fires and other emergencies that involve the assistance from the department such as vehicle accidents, flooding, emergency rescue, and first aid response. When it comes to a fire departments duties and responsibilities when it comes to mutual aid agreements it is to coordinate planning, multiply the response resources available to any one jurisdiction, ensure timely arrival of aid, arrange for specialized resources, and minimize administrative conflict and litigation post-response.
The United States and the European Union are currently in dispute over the trade of genetically modified organisms. These altered plants produce more fruit per acre than traditional methods of farming while protecting the species from insects, environmental changes, and mutations. The output coupled with the benefits of environmental protection yield better products at a cheaper price for consumers. Adam Smith would favor the technologies of genetic modification because the fertility of the land increases, as well as its abundance. This growth results in more agricultural products on the market that require less land for cultivation, and no increase in labor. The consumer is then presented with a cheaper price because there eliminates the need to incur great labor costs and, at times, crop protection inputs such as pesticides. The European Union should allow these products to enter their market freely, to provide the maximum gain to EU consumers.
Throughout history, the United States has initiated policies, peace agreements, or laws which were believed to bring prosperity, and success, however those policies as a result were created in the U.S. best self-interest. One of these policies is known as NAFTA, which was a trade agreement created to open up free trade around the globe, however this policy backfired, deeply scaring and deteriorating the Latin American economy, and its people. Specifically, NAFTA known as the North American Free Trade Agreement, took effect on January 1, 1994 was a treaty which entered by the United States, Canada, and Mexico used to eliminate tariff barriers, in order to encourage economic prosperity between these three countries. A quarter century later, the
Treaty 6 is a contract made in 1876 between Indigenous bands, including the Cree, Ojibwa and Assiniboine and the Canadian monarchy. The agreement overviewed the ownership and uses of land in Central Alberta and Saskatchewan. The indigenous people ceded their land to the use of the monarchy, in exchange for settlements including annual payments, farming tools, land reserves, and health supplies. It can be said that the written text of Treaty 6 conveys only part of its complex meaning. This notion is explored through the ideas and stories from Sharon H. Venne, Calvin Bruneau of the Papaschase Cree, and from the treaty text itself.
In December of 1992, Presidents Salinas (Mexico), Bush (U.S.) and Prime Minister Brian Mulroney of Canada signed the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA). The Mexican legislature ratified NAFTA in 1993 and the treaty went into effect on January 1, 1994, creating the largest free-trade zone in the world.
Roughly fifteen year ago the United States entered into an agreement with its neighboring countries Canada and Mexico. With the incarnation of this intercontinental free trade agreement; the United States acting as the conduit would not only increase trade productivity for itself but, allot its sister nations to the north and south the same advantages. The North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) is beneficial to America because, it encourages the expansion of job opportunities, abolishes taxes and tariffs that can restrict the flow of imports and exports, and supplies the States with goods and services at lower costs causing profits to increase exponentially.
Sheldon, Ian. “Food Principles: Regulating Genetically Modified Crops After The 2006 WTO Ruling.” Brown Journal Of World Affairs 14.1 (2007): 121-134.Academic Search Premier. Web. 2 Nov. 2011.
According to Galyna Sidyelyeva, “research has provided insight into the issue of the nutritional value of GM crops. For example, the Venneria group tested genetically modified wheat, corn, and tomatoes. They found wheat and corn are similar to their non-GM counterparts and tomatoes differ only in their antioxidant content, having a lower amount than their unmodified relatives” (50). With this in mind there are many people in the world today that may find value from GM crops; for example, in countries where people are starving. While the crops may not be identical to its non-GM counterparts, these countries will still profit from them. In “A dubious success: The NGO campaign against GMOs,” Robert Paarlberg asserts, “Unfortunately, in the case of NGO [non-GMO] campaigns against GMO crops, they typically emerge from rich countries while imposing consequences on poor countries” (228). As one can see, these rich countries may have succeeded in not allowing some GMOs in but to date in America they still are not labeled; so, they are only hurting the poor countries by trying to make a controversy over labeling that is
Tomala, l. (2013, May 4). Experts not in agreement on whether enough research was done on GMOs in agriculture. Science and Scholarship in Poland. Retrieved November 26, 2013, from http://www.naukawpolsce.pap.pl/en/news/news,394773,experts-not-in-agreement-on-whether-enough-research-was-done-on-gmos-in-agriculture.html
Advocates claim that the world may benefit greatly from the production and consumption of GM foods, especially those countries with high rates of poverty and starvation. Experts insist that the GM products will put an end to world hunger. It is estimated that the world population will grow up to 9 billion people in 2050, and a good alternative to feed them is the GM products. Nowadays, in almost all African countries people are dying because of hunger and hunger-related diseases. The estimate of life expectation in these countries is fifty seven years old, and it will decrease to forty seven in 2020 (kwengwere 2-3). The governments of these countries are battling to put a stop to this unfair situation. Experts have said that the best alternative is the implementation of GM cultures in Africa; it will reduce the deaths, increase the life expectations and nourish the whole continent (Forsberg 1). The future of Africa is uncertain, but it is sure to depend on the hands of GM p...
Genetically modified food’s, or GMOs, goal is to feed the world's malnourished and undernourished population. Exploring the positive side to GMOs paints a wondrous picture for our planet’s future, although careful steps must be taken to ensure that destruction of our ecosystems do not occur. When GMOs were first introduced into the consumer market they claimed that they would help eliminate the world’s food crisis by providing plants that produced more and were resistant to elemental impacts like droughts and bacterial contaminants, however, production isn’t the only cause for the world’s food crisis. Which is a cause for concern because the population on the earth is growing and our land and ways of agriculture will not be enough to feed everyone sufficiently. No simple solutions can be found or applied when there are so many lives involved. Those who are hungry and those who are over fed, alike, have to consider the consequences of Genetically Modified Organisms. Food should not be treated like a commodity it is a human necessity on the most basic of levels. When egos, hidden agendas, and personal gains are folded into people's food sources no one wins. As in many things of life, there is no true right way or wrong way to handle either of the arguments and so many factors are involved that a ‘simple’ solution is simply not an option.
... There is an expression that the world is round and our actions as developed countries will someday come back to haunt us. Therefore, we have to be responsible if we are to live harmoniously with the rest of the world. Developed countries, like the United States, must face the consequences of presenting GM crops to Third World countries and must offer to amend any problems with honest and just solutions. Developed countries can then truly say that they are responsible leaders of the world.
The current use of technology for GMOs is very useful. Less pesticide is needed to be used for insect pest resistant plants. Technology cuts down on the time it takes to grow a crop. Technology can produce more food for less work and less money. “GM crops are frequently perceived as a ‘technological fix’, proposed by those who fail to address the underlying causes of hunger and poverty, which really require economic, political and social change” (Nuffield Bioethics 29).
The second “giant” that needs to be laid to rest is the fear of agricultural technology and GM crops. Europe has banned the im...