Biotechnology and International Law

Q1 Social Sciences Harvard International Law Journal Pub Date : 2001-05-03 DOI:10.2139/SSRN.266470
S. Murphy
{"title":"Biotechnology and International Law","authors":"S. Murphy","doi":"10.2139/SSRN.266470","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Emerging applications in the field of biotechnology hold great promise for promoting the health and well-being of the global community, especially in developing states. Yet significant concerns have emerged about biotechnology in the transnational sphere, concerns that no doubt will increase in decades to come. The purpose of the article is to assess the strengths and limits of existing international norms and structures designed to address these concerns, and to suggest a means for augmenting current structures to make them more effective. International law develops and regulates transnational behavior in a manner that goes well beyond the development treaty regimes. International law is driven in large part by the self-interest of states, but they also arise from the social interaction of states and non-state actors, and they ultimately must become grounded in national laws and society in order to become effective. This article accordingly emphasizes the need for coordination at different levels of state and non-state behavior as the law develops over time as well as the need for coordination across different treaty regimes. While states should continue to grapple with concerns in the area of biotechnology through incremental tinkering of existing treaty regimes - seen most recently in the adoption of a Biosafety Protocol to the Convention on Biological Diversity - the article argues that the principal emphasis of the global community on episodic and segmented intergovernmental negotiations as a means for addressing these concerns is misplaced, especially since the science in this area is changing rapidly, the behavior to be regulated is highly commercial and private in nature, and transnational regulation affects a wide variety of state and non-state actors who have complex motivations that change over time. At the same time, the many issues raised by biotechnology in the transnational sphere should not be left to the vagaries of the market, to governments alone, or to the initiatives of a few well-financed interest groups, such as biotechnology companies and environmentalists. Instead they need to be addressed by international society as a whole. One approach would be to establish a transnational forum on biotechnology, which could serve as a relatively informal and non-binding means for the transnational \"bargaining\" of views among a wide range of relevant non-state actors. Such a forum ultimately may be instrumental in achieving consensus on a coherent and effective legal regime to address concerns with transnational biotechnology, one that balances the tremendous opportunities of biotechnology against its potentially severe and adverse transnational effects.","PeriodicalId":35765,"journal":{"name":"Harvard International Law Journal","volume":"42 1","pages":"47-140"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2001-05-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"17","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Harvard International Law Journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/SSRN.266470","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"Social Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 17

Abstract

Emerging applications in the field of biotechnology hold great promise for promoting the health and well-being of the global community, especially in developing states. Yet significant concerns have emerged about biotechnology in the transnational sphere, concerns that no doubt will increase in decades to come. The purpose of the article is to assess the strengths and limits of existing international norms and structures designed to address these concerns, and to suggest a means for augmenting current structures to make them more effective. International law develops and regulates transnational behavior in a manner that goes well beyond the development treaty regimes. International law is driven in large part by the self-interest of states, but they also arise from the social interaction of states and non-state actors, and they ultimately must become grounded in national laws and society in order to become effective. This article accordingly emphasizes the need for coordination at different levels of state and non-state behavior as the law develops over time as well as the need for coordination across different treaty regimes. While states should continue to grapple with concerns in the area of biotechnology through incremental tinkering of existing treaty regimes - seen most recently in the adoption of a Biosafety Protocol to the Convention on Biological Diversity - the article argues that the principal emphasis of the global community on episodic and segmented intergovernmental negotiations as a means for addressing these concerns is misplaced, especially since the science in this area is changing rapidly, the behavior to be regulated is highly commercial and private in nature, and transnational regulation affects a wide variety of state and non-state actors who have complex motivations that change over time. At the same time, the many issues raised by biotechnology in the transnational sphere should not be left to the vagaries of the market, to governments alone, or to the initiatives of a few well-financed interest groups, such as biotechnology companies and environmentalists. Instead they need to be addressed by international society as a whole. One approach would be to establish a transnational forum on biotechnology, which could serve as a relatively informal and non-binding means for the transnational "bargaining" of views among a wide range of relevant non-state actors. Such a forum ultimately may be instrumental in achieving consensus on a coherent and effective legal regime to address concerns with transnational biotechnology, one that balances the tremendous opportunities of biotechnology against its potentially severe and adverse transnational effects.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
生物技术与国际法
生物技术领域的新兴应用为促进全球社会,特别是发展中国家的健康和福祉带来了巨大希望。然而,对跨国领域生物技术的重大关切已经出现,这种关切无疑将在未来几十年增加。本文的目的是评估旨在解决这些问题的现有国际规范和结构的长处和局限性,并提出一种加强现有结构使其更有效的方法。国际法以远远超出发展条约制度的方式发展和规范跨国行为。国际法在很大程度上是由国家自身利益驱动的,但它们也源于国家和非国家行为体的社会互动,它们最终必须以国家法律和社会为基础,才能发挥作用。因此,本文强调了随着时间的推移,在国家和非国家行为的不同层面上进行协调的必要性,以及在不同条约制度之间进行协调的必要性。虽然各国应该继续通过对现有条约制度的逐步修补来解决生物技术领域的问题——最近的例子是通过了《生物多样性公约》的《生物安全议定书》——这篇文章认为,国际社会主要强调断断续续和分段的政府间谈判作为解决这些问题的手段是错误的,特别是因为这一领域的科学正在迅速变化。被监管的行为在本质上是高度商业化和私人化的,跨国监管影响到各种各样的国家和非国家行为体,这些行为体的动机随着时间的推移而变化。与此同时,生物技术在跨国领域提出的许多问题不应该留给市场的反复无常,不应该只留给政府,也不应该留给少数资金充足的利益集团,如生物技术公司和环境保护主义者的主动行动。相反,这些问题需要国际社会作为一个整体来解决。一种办法是建立一个关于生物技术的跨国论坛,它可以作为一种相对非正式和不具约束力的手段,在各种有关的非国家行为体之间进行跨国“讨价还价”。这样一个论坛最终可能有助于就一个连贯和有效的法律制度达成协商一致意见,以处理对跨国生物技术的关切,一个平衡生物技术的巨大机会与其潜在的严重和不利的跨国影响的法律制度。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Harvard International Law Journal
Harvard International Law Journal Social Sciences-Law
CiteScore
1.90
自引率
0.00%
发文量
2
期刊介绍: In an opinion survey published in The International Lawyer, senior scholars in the international and comparative law fields ranked the Harvard International Law Journal as having the “strongest academic reputation” of all student-edited international and comparative law specialty journals published in the United States. The ILJ publishes articles on international, comparative, and foreign law, the role of international law in U.S. courts, and the international ramifications of U.S. domestic law. These articles are written by the most prominent scholars and practitioners in the field and have been recognized as important contributions to the development of international law.
期刊最新文献
The Human Right to peace What is an International Crime? (A Revisionist History) Power Shifts in International Law: Structural Realignment and Substantive Pluralism Behavioral International Law and Economics Getting to Rights: Treaty Ratification, Constitutional Convergence, and Human Rights Practice
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1