Skip to main content
Log in

When goliaths clash: US and EU differences over the labeling of food products derived from genetically modified organisms

  • Published:
Agriculture and Human Values Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

There is a fundamental divergence of opinion between the EU and the US over how food products derived from genetically modified organisms should be labeled. This has less to do with safety, as moves towards the international harmonization of safety standards continue apace, and rather more to do with the consumers' right to know about the origins of the food they are consuming. This paper uses a framework drawn from the global public goods (GPG) literature of economics and the work by international relations theorists on formal international organizations (FIO) to explain why there is presently no global consensus on the manner (voluntary or mandatory) in which GM food products should be labeled.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Abbott, K. W. (1997). ''The intersection of law and trade in the WTO system: Economics and the transition to a hard law system.'' In D. Orden and D. Roberts (eds.), Understanding Technical Barriers to Agricultural Trade. Minneapolis: International Agricultural Trade Consortium.

    Google Scholar 

  • Abbott, K. W. and D. Snidal (1998). ''Why states act through formal international organizations.'' Journal of Conflict Resolution 42(1): 3-32.

    Google Scholar 

  • Abbott, K. W., R. O. Keohane, A. Moravcsik, A.-M. Slaughter, and D. Snidal (2000). ''The concept of legalization.'' International Organization 54(3): 401-19.

    Google Scholar 

  • Barrett, S. (2001). ''International cooperation for sale.'' European Economic Review 45(10): 1835-1850.

    Google Scholar 

  • Blackwell, C. and M. McKee (2002). ''Only for my own neighborhood? Preferences and voluntary provision of local and global public goods.'' Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization 1510: 1-17.

    Google Scholar 

  • Broz, J. L. (1999). ''Origins of the federal reserve system: International incentives and the domestic free-rider problem.'' International Organization 53(1): 39-70.

    Google Scholar 

  • Buchanan, J. (1968). The Demand and Supply of Public Goods. Chicago: Rand MacNally.

    Google Scholar 

  • Byrne, D. (2001). Labeling of Foodstuffs-Key for Consumers, Round Table on Food Quality, Safety and Production, Paris, July 11. Retrieved from http://europa.eu.int/comm/ food/fs/gmo/biotech09_en.pdf on August 1, 2002.

  • De Blaeij, A. T. and D. J. vanVuuren (2003). ''Risk perception of traffic participants.'' Accident Analysis and Prevention 35(2): 167-175.

    Google Scholar 

  • CA (Consumers Association) (2002). ''GM dilemmas-consumers and genetically modified foods.'' Policy Report, London.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cerny, P. G. (2000). ''Structuring the political arena: Public goods, states and governance in a globalising world,'' In R. Palan (ed.), Global Political Economy. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • CFIA (Canadian Food Inspection Agency) (2002a). ''International activity on the labeling of foods derived from biotechnology.'' Office of Biotechnology. Retrieved from http:// www.inspection.gc.ca/english/ppc/biotech/labeti/intere.shtml on August 10, 2002.

  • CFIA (2002b). ''Developing a canadian standard for the voluntary labeling of foods derived from biotechnology, office of biotechnology.'' Retrieved from http://www.inspection.gc.ca/english/ppc/biotech/labeti/develae.shtml on August 10, 2002.

  • Chen, L. C., T. G. Evans, and R. A. Cash (1999). ''Health as a global public good.'' In I. Kaul, I. Grunberg, and M. A. Stern (eds.), Global Public Goods: International Cooperation in the 21st Century. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chesterman, S. (2002). ''Legality versus legitimacy: Humanitarian intervention, the security council, and the rule of law.'' Security Dialogue 33(3): 293-307.

    Google Scholar 

  • CNN (2001). Iceland isolated at whaling summit, 24 July. Retrieved from http://edition.cnn.com/2001/WORLD/ europe/07/23/iceland.whaling/ on July 26, 2002.

  • Detweiler, J. B., B. T. Bedell, P. Salovey, E. Pronin, and A. J. Rothman (1999). ''Message framing and sunscreen use: Gain-framed messages motivate beach-goers.'' Health Psychology. 18(2): 189-196.

    Google Scholar 

  • Drifte, R. (1999). Japan's Quest for a Permanent Security Council Seat: A Matter of Pride or Prejudicé Oxford: Palgrave/ MacMillan (St. Antony's Series).

    Google Scholar 

  • Economist, The (2000). ''Maybe those anti-capitalist, unscientific europeans are against GM food. But we optimistic, pro-capitalist scientific Americans know better.'' January 15.

  • Ewen, S. W. B. and A. Pusztai (1999). ''Effects of diets containing genetically modified potatoes expressing Galanthus Nivalis lectin on rat small intestine.'' Lancet 354: 1353-1354.

    Google Scholar 

  • Eurobarometer (2001). ''Europeans, science and technology: Main results of eurobarometer.'' 55.2 (December 2001). Retrieved from http://europa.eu.int/comm/public_opinion/ archives/eb/ebs_154_key_en.pdf, on August 16, 2002.

  • EU. Directive 2001/18/EU. On the deliberate release into the environment of genetically modified organisms and repealing council directive 90/220/EEC. Retrieved from http:// europa.eu.int/eur-lex/en/archive/2001/l_10620010417en.html on August 25, 2002.

  • EU. Directive 90/220/EEC. On the deliberate release into the environment of genetically modified organisms. Retrieved from http://europa.eu.int/smartapi/cgi/sga_doc?smartapi!cel exapi!prod!CELEXnumdoc&lg=EN&numdoc=31990L0220 &model=guichett on August 25, 2002.

  • EU. Press Release IP/02/100. ''European food safety authority adopted-council agrees key legislation putting a new European-wide food safety system in place.'' Retrieved from http://www.foodlaw.rdg.ac.uk/news/eu-02003.htm on August 28, 2002.

  • EU. OJE.17/9/2002. Opinion of the economic and social committee on the ''Proposal for a regulation of the European parliament and of the council on genetically modified food and feed.'' Retrieved from http://europa.eu.int/eur-lex/pri/en/oj/ dat/2002/c_221/c_22120020917en01140120.pdf on August 20, 2002.

  • EU. COM (2001)425. Proposal for a regulation of the European parliament and of the council on genetically modified food and feed. Retrieved from http://home.prolink.de/_hps/ organic/SANCO-1773-2001-draftregulationnovelfoodandnov elfeed29-06-2001.htm on July 28, 2002.

  • EU. 2001/0173/COD. Proposal for a regulation of the European parliament and of the council on genetically modified food and feed. Retrieved from http://europa. eu.int/comm/food/fs/gmo/biotech08_en.pdf on August 29, 2002.

  • EU. 2001/0180/COD. Proposal for a regulation on traceability and labeling of GMOs and traceability of food and feed products derived from GMOs. Retrieved from http://europa.eu.int/ comm/food/fs/gmo/biotech09_en.pdf on August 29, 2002.

  • EU. EC 178/2002. Regulation laying down the general principles and requirements of food Law, establishing the European food safety authority and laying down procedures in the matter of food safety. Retrieved from http://europa.eu.int/eur-lex/ pri/en/oj/dat/2002/l_031/l_03120020201en0 0010024.pdf on August 28, 2002.

  • EU. EC 50/2000. Regulation on the labeling of foodstuffs and food ingredients containing additives and flavourings that have been genetically modified or produced from genetically modified organisms. Retrieved from http:// europa.eu.int/eur-lex/en/consleg/pdf/2000/en_2000R0050_ do_001.pdf on August 29, 2002.

  • EU. EC 49/2000. Regulation amending regulation No 1139/98 concerning the compulsory indication on the labeling of certain foodstuffs produced from genetically modified organisms of particulars other than those provided for in directive 79/ 112/EEC. Retrieved from http://europa.eu.int/eur-lex/en/dat/ 2000/l_006/l_00620000111en00130014.pdf on August 26, 2002.

  • EU. EC 1139/98. Amending regulation no.1139/98 concerning the compulsory indication on the labeling of certain foodstuffs produced from genetically modified organisms of particulars other than those provided for in directive 79/112/ EEC. Retrieved from http://www.ncbe.rdg.ac.uk/NCBE/ GMFOOD/eureg1139-98.html on August 30, 2002.

  • EU. EC 258/97. Regulation concerning novel foods and novel food ingredients. Retrieved from http://europa.eu.int/smartapi/ cgi/sga_doc?smartapi!celexapi!prod!CELEXnumdoc&lg= EN&numdoc=31997R0258&model=guichett on August 26, 2002.

  • FDA (1992). Statement of Policy: Foods Derived from New Plant Varieties. Federal Register 29 May 1992 57: 22984.

    Google Scholar 

  • FDA (2000). ''Report on consumer focus groups on biotechnology.'' Retrieved from http://www.cfsan.fda.gov/_comm/ biorpt.html on July 30, 2002.

  • FDA (2001a). ''Guidance for industry: voluntary labeling indicating whether foods have or have not been developed using bioengineering.'' Retrieved from http://www.fda.gov/ opacom/laws/fdcact/fdcact4.htm on July 28, 2002.

  • FDA (2001b). ''Letter from center for food safety et al.,'' FDA Docket 00D-1598. Retrieved from http://www. fda.gov/ohrms/dockets/dailys/01/Aug01/082701/c008951.pdf on August 28, 2002.

  • Federal Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA) (1938) (As Amended). Retrieved from http://www.fda.gov/opacom/ laws/fdcact/fdcact4.htm on August 10, 2002.

  • FOE (Friends of the Earth) (2002a). ''Real food news: Euro MPs back GM labeling.'' Retrieved from http: //www.foe.co. uk/campaigns/real_food/news/2002/july/july_3.html on December 10, 2002.

  • FOE (Friends of the Earth) (2002b). ''Real food news: Trade war looms in EU/US GM label row.'' Retrieved from http:// www.foe.co.uk/campaigns/real_food/news/2002/october/ october_1.html on October 18, 2002.

  • FSAI (Food Safety Authority of Ireland) 2001. Survey of tortilla chips and taco shells for GMOs completed (21 May press release). Retrieved from http://193.120.54.7/news/ press/pr_01/pr20010502.asp on July 30, 2002.

  • GM Science Review (2002). GM Science Review Panel. Retrieved from http://www.gmsciencedebate.org.uk/panel/ default.htm on December 12, 2002.

  • Goldstein, J. and L. L. Martin (2000). ''Legalization, trade liberalization, and domestic politics: A cautionary note,'' International Organization 54(3): 603-32.

    Google Scholar 

  • Guardian, The (2003). ''GM licensing gets go ahead.'' March 4, 2003.

  • Guardian, The (2003). ''US halts plan to foist GM food on Europe.'' February 21, 2003.

  • Guardian, The (2003). ''Stung into action.'' January 22, 2003.

  • Guardian, The (2002). ''Seeds of doubt.'' October 18, 2002.

  • Hackl, F. and G. J. Pruckner (2002). ''How global is the solution to global warming?'' Economic Modelling 20: 93-117.

    Google Scholar 

  • Harlander, S. K. (2002). ''Safety assessments and public concern for genetically modified food products: The American view.'' Toxic Pathology 30(1): 132-4.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hudec, R. E. (1999). ''The new WTO dispute settlement procedure.'' Minnesota Journal of Global Trade 8(1): 1-53.

    Google Scholar 

  • IFT (Institute of Food Technologists) (2000). ''IFT expert report on biotechnology and foods'' subsequently reprinted in Food Technology 54(8-10).

    Google Scholar 

  • Isaac, G. E. (2001). Agricultural Technology and Transatlantic Trade: Regulatory Barriers to GM Crops, CABI Publishing: Wallingford, UK.

    Google Scholar 

  • Isaac, G. E. and W. A. Kerr (2003). ''Genetically modified organisms and trade rules: Identifying important challenges for the WTO.'' The World Economy 26(1): 29-42.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jansen, M. and A. L. de Faria (2002). ''Product labeling, quality and international trade.'' WTO Staff Working Paper DERD-2002-01.

  • Kahler, M. (2000). ''Conclusion: The causes of legalization,'' International Organization 54(3): 661-683.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kahneman, D. and A. Tversky (1979). ''Prospect Theory: An analysis of decision under risk.'' Econometrica 47: 263-291.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kapur, D. (2002). ''The common pool dilemma of global public goods: Lessons from the World Bank's net income and reserves.'' World Development 30(3): 337-354.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kaul, I., I. Grunberg, and M. A. Stern (1999). ''Defining global public goods.'' In I. Kaul, I. Grunberg, and M. A. Stern (eds.), Global Public Goods: International Cooperation in the 21st Century. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kaul, I. and M. Faust (2001). ''Global public goods and health: Taking the agenda forward.'' Bulletin of the World Health Organization 79(9): 869-874.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kerr. W. A. (1999). ''International trade in transgenic food products: A new focus for agricultural trade disputes.'' The World Economy 22(2): 245-259.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kerr, W. A. and J. E. Hobbs (2002). ''The north American-European union dispute over beef produced using growth hormones: A major test for the new international trade regime.'' The World Economy 25(2): 283-296.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kirchhoff, S. and A. Zago (2001). ''A simple model of voluntary vs mandatory labeling of GMOs,'' Mimeo.

  • Koremenos, B., C. Lipson, and D. Snidal (2001). ''The rational design of international institutions.'' International Organization 55(4): 761-799.

    Google Scholar 

  • KPMG (2000). ''Potential costs of mandatory labeling of food products derived from biotechnology in Canada.'' Mimeo.

  • Masciandaro, D. (1999). ''Money laundering: The economics of regulation.'' European Journal of Law and Economics 7(3): 225-240.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mariojouls, C. and C. R. Wessells (2002). ''Certification and quality signals in the aquaculture sector in france.'' Marine Resource Economics 17(2): 175-180.

    Google Scholar 

  • Marsden, T., J. Banks, and G. Bristow (2000). ''Food supply chain approaches: Exploring their role in rural development.'' Sociologia Ruralis 40(4): 424-438.

    Google Scholar 

  • Martin, L. L. and B. A. Simmons (1998). ''Theories and empirical studies of international institutions.'' International Organization 52(4): 729-757.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mearsheimer, J. (1995). ''The false promise of international institutions.'' International Security 19: 5-49.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mitchell, R. B. and P. M. Keilbacch (2001). ''Situation structure and institutional design: Reciprocity, coercion, and exchange.'' International Organization 55(4): 891-917.

    Google Scholar 

  • Moshirian, F. (2002). ''New international financial architecture.'' Journal of Multinational Financial Management 12(4/5): 273-284.

    Google Scholar 

  • NERA (National Economic Research Associates) (2001). ''Economic appraisal of options for extension of legislation on GM labeling: A final report for the food standards agency,'' May, London.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nordlee, J. A., S. L. Taylor, J. A. Townsend, L. A. Thomas, and R. K. Bush (1996). ''Identification of a Brazil nut allergen in transgenic soybeans.'' New England Journal of Medicine 334: 688-694.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nye. Jr, J. S. (2002). ''The American national interest and global public goods.'' International Affairs 78(2): 233-244.

    Google Scholar 

  • Olsen, R. A. (1997). ''Prospect theory: As an explanation of risky choice by professional investors: Some evidence.'' Review of Financial Economics 6(2): 225-232.

    Google Scholar 

  • Otsuki, T., J. S. Wilson, and M. Sewadeh (2002). ''Saving two in a billion: A case study to quantify the trade effect of European food safety standards on African exports.'' World Bank Development Research Group (DECRG). Washington: The World Bank.

    Google Scholar 

  • Oxfam (2002). ''US bullying on drug patents: One year after doha.'' Oxfam Briefing Paper No. 33.

  • Pauwelyn, J. (1999). ''The WTO agreement on sanitary and phytosanitary (SPS) measures as applied in the first three SPS disputes.'' Journal of International Economic Law 2(4): 641-664.

    Google Scholar 

  • Perdikis, N., W. A. Kerr, J. E. Hobbs (2001). ''Reforming the WTO to defuse potential trade conflicts in genetically modi-fied goods.'' The World Economy 24(3): 379-398.

    Google Scholar 

  • Quick, R. and A. Blüthner (1999). ''Has the appellate body erred? An appraisal and criticism of the ruling in the WTO hormones case.'' Journal of International Economic Law 2(4): 603-639.

    Google Scholar 

  • Reiter, M. and A. J. Weichenrieder (1999). ''Public goods, club goods and the measurement of crowding.'' Journal of Urban Economics 46(1): 69-79.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rosendorff, B. P. and H. V. Milner (2001). ''The optimal design of international trade institutions: Uncertainty and escape.'' International Organization 55(4): 829-857.

    Google Scholar 

  • Royal Society (1999). ''Review of data on possible toxicity of GM potatoes.'' Royal Society of London Statement, Number 9, June.

  • Royal Society (2002). ''Genetically modified plants for food use and human health-an update.'' Policy Document 4/02. Retrieved from http: //www.royalsoc.ac.uk on July 16, 2002.

  • Rubin v Coors Brewing Co, 514 US 476 (1995). Retrieved from http://supct.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/93-1631.ZS.html on August 21, 2002.

  • Salyers, A. (2000). ''Genetically engineered foods: Safety issues associated with antibiotic resistance genes.'' Retrieved from http://www.healthsci.tufts.edu/apua/salyersreport.htm on May 20, 2001.

  • Samuelson, P. A. (1954). ''The pure theory of public expenditure.'' Review of Economics and Statistics 11: 387-389.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sandler, T. (1999). ''Intergenerational public goods: Strategies, efficiency and institutions.'' In I. Kaul, I., Grunberg, and M. A. Stern (eds.), Global Public Goods: International Cooperation in the 21st Century. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sen, A. (1999). ''Global justice: Beyond international equity.'' In I. Kaul, I., Grunberg, and M. A. Stern (eds.), Global Public Goods: International Cooperation in the 21st Century. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Smith, J. M. (2000). ''The politics of dispute settlement design: Explaining legalism in regional trade pacts.'' International Organization 54(1): 137-180.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stiglitz, J. (1995). ''The theory of international public goods and the architecture of international organizations.'' UN Department for Economic and Social Information and Policy Analysis Background Paper Number 7. New York: United Nations.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tariq, S. M., M. Stevens, S. Matthews, S. Ridout, R. Twiselton, and D. W. Hide (1996). ''Cohort study of peanut and tree nut sensitisation by age of 4 years.'' British Medical Journal 313: 514-517.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tomich, T. P., M. van Noordwijk, S. A. Vosti, and J. Witcover (1998). ''Agricultural development with rainforest conservation: Methods for seeking best bet alternatives to Slash-and-Burn, with applications to Brazil and Indonesia.'' Agricultural Economics 19(1/2): 159-174.

    Google Scholar 

  • Virginia State Board of Pharmacy v Virginia Citizens Consumer Council, 425 US 748 (1976).

  • Wade, R. (1996). ''Japan, the World Bank, and the art of paradigm maintenance: The east Asian experience.'' New Left Review 217: 3-34.

    Google Scholar 

  • WHO-WTO (2002). WTO agreements and public health. Retrieved from http://www.wto.org/english/res_e/booksp_e/ who_wto_e.pdf on September 1, 2002.

  • Wilson, J. S. and T. Otsuki (2001). ''Global food trade and food safety: Winners and losers in a fragmented system.'' Washington, DC: World Bank Development Research Group (DECRG), The World Bank.

    Google Scholar 

  • Woods, N. (2002). ''Global governance and the role of institutions.'' In D. Held and A. McGrew (eds.), Governing Globalization: Power, Authority and Global Governance. Oxford: Polity Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • WTO (2002a). Committee on sanitary and phytosanitary measures/ committee on technical barriers to trade-response from the European commission to comments submitted by WTO members under either or both G/TBT/N/EEC/6 and G/SPS/N/EEC/149, Document 02-4153.

  • WTO (2002b). Committee on sanitary and phytosanitary measures/ committee on technical barriers to trade-response from the European commission to comments submitted by WTO members under either or both G/TBT/N/EEC/7 and G/SPS/N/EEC/150, Document 02-4173.

  • WTO-TBT. Agreement on technical barriers to trade. Retrieved from http://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/tbt_e/ tbtagr.htm on August 1, 2002.

  • WTO. Dispute Settlements Panel. Retrieved from http://www. wto.org/english/tratop_e/dispu_e/dispu_status_e.htm#2002 on September 2, 2002.

  • DS26 (1995). European communities: Measures concerning meat and meat products (hormones) (brought by US).

  • DS27 (1995). European communities: Regime for the importation, sale and distribution of bananas (brought by Ecuador, Guatemala, Honduras, Mexico, US).

  • DS63 (1996). United States: Anti-dumping measures on imports of solid urea (brought by EC).

  • DS104 (1997). European communities: Measures affecting the exportation of processed cheese (brought by US).

  • DS125 and DS124 (1998). European communities: Enforcement of intellectual property rights for motion pictures and TV programmers. Greece: Enforcement of intellectual property rights for motion pictures and TV programmers (brought by US).

  • DS151 (1998). United States: Measures affecting textiles and apparel products (II) (brought by EC).

  • DS158 (1999). European communities: Regime for the importation, sale and distribution of bananas (II) (brought by Guatemala, Honduras, Mexico, Panama, US).

  • DS160 (1999). United States: Section 110(5) of the US copyright act (brought by EC).

  • DS172 (1999). European communities: measures relating to the development of a flight management system (brought by US).

  • DS174 (1999). European communities: Measures relating to the protection of trademarks & geographical indications (brought by US).

  • DS214 (2000). United States: Definitive safeguard measures on imports of steel wire rod and circular welded carbon quality line pipe (brought by EC).

  • DS248 (2002). United States: Definitive safeguard measures on import of certain steel products (brought by EC).

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Thorpe, A., Robinson, C. When goliaths clash: US and EU differences over the labeling of food products derived from genetically modified organisms. Agriculture and Human Values 21, 287–298 (2004). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10460-003-1204-8

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10460-003-1204-8

Navigation