NationStates

OOC: A proposal to regulate the international trade of GMOs.

GMO International Trade Accord

Category: Regulation
Area of Effect: Consumer Protection

The World Assembly,

Admiring the potential of agricultural biotechnology to revolutionize food production, bolster commercial growth, and ensure food security for peoples throughout the world,

Recognizing genetically modified organisms as a crucial product of agricultural biotechnology, which offer immense benefits in crop yield, pest resistance, and other areas,

Understanding that genetically modified organisms by their very nature present a potentially extreme hazard to national populations, due in no small part to the unpredictability of novel genetic material, which poses substantial risks such as increased selection pressure on native organisms, gene transfer resulting in resistant pests and microorganisms with increased pathogenicity, and the impossibility of removing many such organisms from the environment after their introduction, and

Wishing to encourage the development of agricultural biotechnology while addressing this potential hazard and supporting global conservation and agricultural sustainability efforts through the regulation of the international trade of genetically modified organisms, hereby:

1. Defines for the purposes of this resolution:
   1. "biotechnology" as the application of genetic modification techniques that overcome natural barriers of physiological reproduction or recombination, and are not techniques used in traditional breeding and selection; and
   2. a "genetically modified organism" (GMO) as any living organism or product made from a living organism, including viruses and similar particles, that possesses genetic material in a novel combination obtained through the use of biotechnology, excepting sapient organisms;
2. Establishes the Committee for the Regulation of Modified Products (CRMP) under the International Trade Administration for the purpose of overseeing the implementation of measures pursuant to this resolution, with the following responsibilities:
   1. establishing and maintaining guidelines regarding the international trade of GMOs, in order to protect conservation efforts and biodiversity;
   2. providing guidance on environmental risk assessment of GMOs;
   3. facilitating the exchange of information concerning GMOs;
   4. assisting member nations with the acquisition of resources to safely develop and effectively regulate biotechnology;
   5. assisting member nations with the implementation of measures pursuant to this resolution; and
   6. providing funding to member nations for the purpose of implementing measures pursuant to this resolution, in the event that the member nations in question are demonstrably unable to otherwise implement such measures due to economic limitations;
3. Mandates that member nations:
   1. make decisions regarding the import of GMOs based on scientific environmental risk assessments where reasonable;
   2. take reasonable and effective measures to prevent the illicit shipment or accidental release of GMOs or their genetic material;
   3. take economically feasible measures to promote public awareness of the benefits and risks of GMOs according to a cost-benefit analysis of said measures; and
   4. assist with scientific and technical training regarding GMOs;
4. Reserves to member nations the ability to set their own policies regarding the sterilization of plant GMOs and the use of sterilized plant GMOs, with the following requirements:
   1. said policies must permit the use of sterilized plant GMOs in cases where the environmental benefit of using sterilized plant GMOs would clearly outweigh any downsides of their use; and
   2. said policies must implement reasonable and effective measures to prevent the spread of sterilized plant GMO pollen to any nearby fields of similar plants;
5. Encourages member nations to facilitate more expansive research and development of biotechnology.

We’d just use “genetically modified organism” instead of “modified organism” as it means the same thing and everyone is already familiar with this term. To cut down on filler, use “genetically modified organism (GMO)” in the definition, and use “GMO” from then on. “GMO” will probably do in the title

Flying Eagles wrote:We’d just use “genetically modified organism” instead of “modified organism” as it means the same thing and everyone is already familiar with this term. To cut down on filler, use “genetically modified organism (GMO)” in the definition, and use “GMO” from then on. “GMO” will probably do in the title

OOC: Will do.

OOC: Changed the preamble a bit and added a sterilization clause.

Could you clarify what concrete actions are meant by these clauses:

Imperium Anglorum wrote:Could you clarify what concrete actions are meant by these clauses:

Mandates that member nations... take measures to prevent the illicit shipment or accidental release of GMOs; take measures to promote public awareness of information regarding GMOs;

I added that said measures must be implemented to the fullest extent economically feasible. These measures are to be advised by CROP.

Cretox State wrote:

Imperium Anglorum wrote:Could you clarify what concrete actions are meant by these clauses:

Mandates that member nations... take measures to prevent the illicit shipment or accidental release of GMOs; take measures to promote public awareness of information regarding GMOs;

I added that said measures must be implemented to the fullest extent economically feasible. These measures are to be advised by CROP.

I would use a cost-benefit analysis for that instead of 'fullest extent economically feasible'. That latter standard would have nations employing people to check for pollen grains around every field if they could pay for it. I am still very unclear as to what you want the public to know. Awareness is only important as a goal when people don't know that something exists (like some disaster). But people know that GMOs exist. The actual issue is what they ought to know about them.

Imperium Anglorum wrote:I would use a cost-benefit analysis for that instead of 'fullest extent economically feasible'. That latter standard would have nations employing people to check for pollen grains around every field if they could pay for it. I am still very unclear as to what you want the public to know. Awareness is only important as a goal when people don't know that something exists (like some disaster). But people know that GMOs exist. The actual issue is what they ought to know about them.

OOC: Okay... how about this version?

The title should probably be Trade of Genetically Modified Organisms. I don't think most of our delegations know what a "modified organism" is, so use the "Genetically" qualifier.

Flying Eagles wrote:The title should probably be Trade of Genetically Modified Organisms. I don't think most of our delegations know what a "modified organism" is, so use the "Genetically" qualifier.

How about "GMO International Trade Accord"?

Cretox State wrote:

Flying Eagles wrote:The title should probably be Trade of Genetically Modified Organisms. I don't think most of our delegations know what a "modified organism" is, so use the "Genetically" qualifier.

How about "GMO International Trade Accord"?

Should be good

OOC: Please define "traditional breeding and selection", as your definition of GMO hinges on that. And I don't mean within the proposal.

Also, you have like 20 drafts going on at once. Maybe pick one or two to focus on?

IC: "Any attempt to affect the creation, use or trade of genetically modified organisms gets a clear NO from us, especially when you would like to hand all power over the decisions over to a committee. Like seriously, what is it with you kids, not seeing how that is a bad thing, given the gnomes are unlikely to think like you? If you want international procedures in place, STOP BEING LAZY AND ACTUALLY WRITE THE PROCEDURES YOURSELF."

OOC: What she said. Your proposals all seem to be "give all the power to the gnomes and pretend nations are little children and thus unable to decide anything or govern themselves", which does not make for good legislation.

Araraukar wrote:OOC: Please define "traditional breeding and selection", as your definition of GMO hinges on that. And I don't mean within the proposal.

Also, you have like 20 drafts going on at once. Maybe pick one or two to focus on?

IC: "Any attempt to affect the creation, use or trade of genetically modified organisms gets a clear NO from us, especially when you would like to hand all power over the decisions over to a committee. Like seriously, what is it with you kids, not seeing how that is a bad thing, given the gnomes are unlikely to think like you? If you want international procedures in place, STOP BEING LAZY AND ACTUALLY WRITE THE PROCEDURES YOURSELF."

OOC: What she said. Your proposals all seem to be "give all the power to the gnomes and pretend nations are little children and thus unable to decide anything or govern themselves", which does not make for good legislation.

Personally, we think this resolution will solve many of its problems by removing 2a and expanding on its desires in clause 3. The powers in 2a are too strong for a committee.

Draft 2 is up. I gutted much of the committee's power, and relegated it to an advisory and assistance role. The sterilization of GMOs makes a good chunk of the committee's regulations redundant, anyway.

Cretox State wrote:The sterilization of GMOs makes a good chunk of the committee's regulations redundant, anyway.

OOC: Proposal doesn't actually make any mention of sterilization. Which bit do you mean?

Araraukar wrote:

Cretox State wrote:The sterilization of GMOs makes a good chunk of the committee's regulations redundant, anyway.

OOC: Proposal doesn't actually make any mention of sterilization. Which bit do you mean?

OOC:

3(b). Mandates that member nations... require producers of GMOs to ensure that every GMO produced to which this clause can reasonably be applied is unable to biologically reproduce through natural physiological methods;

OOC: Bumping this.

Cretox State wrote:[*]Mandates that member nations:
require producers of GMOs to ensure that every such organism produced to which this clause can reasonably be applied is unable to biologically reproduce through natural physiological methods;

"Ambassador," said Feren, who did not appear to have ever entered the room, but undoubtedly stood before the assembly now, "You will have to forgive me for drawing an example from history, but prior to the rise of the Imperium, it was not uncommon for agricultural interests to find themselves required to repurchase seed following every harvest, were entirely worthless to the sustaining of a crop. Whether by simple need to keep up with the demands of a market that could not be met by unmodified crops, or by contractual obligation with one point in the supply chain or another. Simply put, Ambassador, it resulted in entirely avoidable and damaging rises in the cost of food, and generally made agriculture highly inaccessible.

This clause, would require that Member-States allow such situations, and prevent them from taking any action to support more sustainable and less predatory operations.

In modern concerns, this clause would also completely destroy Imperial agriculture as it stands, and beyond the obvious difficulties of such a demand, would require the Imperium to divert research to redesigning approved modifications to a mode of operation with subtantially greater cost and dramatically reduced efficiency. We cannot support this legislation if this clause remains."

Tinfect wrote:

Cretox State wrote:[*]Mandates that member nations:
require producers of GMOs to ensure that every such organism produced to which this clause can reasonably be applied is unable to biologically reproduce through natural physiological methods;

"Ambassador," said Feren, who did not appear to have ever entered the room, but undoubtedly stood before the assembly now, "You will have to forgive me for drawing an example from history, but prior to the rise of the Imperium, it was not uncommon for agricultural interests to find themselves required to repurchase seed following every harvest, were entirely worthless to the sustaining of a crop. Whether by simple need to keep up with the demands of a market that could not be met by unmodified crops, or by contractual obligation with one point in the supply chain or another. Simply put, Ambassador, it resulted in entirely avoidable and damaging rises in the cost of food, and generally made agriculture highly inaccessible.

This clause, would require that Member-States allow such situations, and prevent them from taking any action to support more sustainable and less predatory operations.

In modern concerns, this clause would also completely destroy Imperial agriculture as it stands, and beyond the obvious difficulties of such a demand, would require the Imperium to divert research to redesigning approved modifications to a mode of operation with subtantially greater cost and dramatically reduced efficiency. We cannot support this legislation if this clause remains."

"We altered the offending subclause and made it a standalone clause that reserves this right to member nations, with one exception. How does it look now?"

OOC: Was writing a thorough feedback thing, then some faint memory made me check the passed resolutions, and I found this. Given that GMO organisms cannot by definition be native species (as they're artificially created), they would be affected by that by default, so given the modifier on non-native species there is "that, upon introduction into or nearby the agricultural ecosystems of a member state, significantly imperil the health or productivity of those agricultural ecosystems", that seems to match your justification for your proposal so well as to render much of it duplication.

Araraukar wrote:OOC: Was writing a thorough feedback thing, then some faint memory made me check the passed resolutions, and I found this. Given that GMO organisms cannot by definition be native species (as they're artificially created), they would be affected by that by default, so given the modifier on non-native species there is "that, upon introduction into or nearby the agricultural ecosystems of a member state, significantly imperil the health or productivity of those agricultural ecosystems", that seems to match your justification for your proposal so well as to render much of it duplication.

OOC: I have to disagree with you there. Agricultural Invasive Species Act applies to "invasive species," which it defines as:

non-native species of non-sapient life that, upon introduction into or nearby the agricultural ecosystems of a member state, significantly imperil the health or productivity of those agricultural ecosystems

AISA only mandates effective screening of goods for the presence of invasive species, and "prohibits the transportation of live organisms of invasive species or goods contaminated with invasive species without sufficient measures to guarantee containment during transport, to or through areas where they pose a threat to agricultural ecosystems." This proposal targets GMOs specifically, and implements a far greater spread of regulations regarding them. I don't see any clauses that would constitute any significant duplication.

“Clause 3b appears to be doing two different things. Firstly, the clause requires member states to make decisions based on available scientific assessments, which is fair enough. However, the clause then requires that these assessments be released to crop, despite the fact that they might not have come from the member nation’s governments. A state could make decisions based on the scientific assessments of a private university, with which the government has a contract. In which case, releasing these would be considered theft of information.”

Kenmoria wrote:“Clause 3b appears to be doing two different things. Firstly, the clause requires member states to make decisions based on available scientific assessments, which is fair enough. However, the clause then requires that these assessments be released to crop, despite the fact that they might not have come from the member nation’s governments. A state could make decisions based on the scientific assessments of a private university, with which the government has a contract. In which case, releasing these would be considered theft of information.”

"We removed the clauses pertaining to the database or requiring that information to be made available to the committee."

OOC: Bumping this too.

Please remove clause 5, it adds nothing.