Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-t5pn6 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-24T13:46:19.968Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Emerging Federalism of U.S. Biotechnology Policy

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  17 May 2016

David J. Webber
David J. Webber*
Affiliation:
University of Missouri—Columbia, USA
Get access

Abstract

Biotechnology is an evolving policy issue involving a wide variety of federal and state policymakers. While most public and scholarly attention has been focused at the national level, a good deal of state policymaking activity regarding biotechnology has already taken place. The biotechnology issue is not a single, well-defined policy issue but rather a cluster of related issues and concerns. This analysis identifies eight facets of the biotechnology policy issue that have surfaced during congressional debate, committee hearings, and public discussions. This eight-fold characterization of biotechnology development is used to describe recent congressional and state legislative activity affecting biotechnology. Both the complexity and multifaceted nature of the biotechnology issue, and the manner with which it has been dealt by federal and state policymakers, have contributed to the dynamic nature of federalism surrounding this issue.

Type
Biotechnology Policy
Information
Politics and the Life Sciences , Volume 14 , Issue 1 , February 1995 , pp. 65 - 72
Copyright
Copyright © Association for Politics and the Life Sciences 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Baumgartner, F.R. and Jones, B.D. (1993). Agendas and Instability in American Politics. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Bishop, J.E. and Waldholz, M. (1990). Genome: The Story of the Most Astonishing Scientific Adventure of Our Time: The Attempt to Map All the Genes in the Human Body. New York: Simon and Schuster.Google Scholar
Brown, R.S. (1988). “The State Role in Regulating Biotechnology.” Policy Studies Journal 17:148–55.Google Scholar
Diamond v. Chakrabarty (1980). 100 S. Ct. 2204, U.S. Reports 477:303–22.Google Scholar
Doyle, J. (1985). Altered Harvest. New York: Viking Penguin.Google Scholar
Fox, J.L. (1990). “Toward Unified Rules on Deliberate Release.” Biotechnology (June):499.Google Scholar
General Accounting Office (1986). Biotechnology: Analysis of Federally Funded Research. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.Google Scholar
Industrial Biotechnology Association (1989). Survey of State Government Legislation on Biotechnology. Washington, DC: Industrial Biotechnology Association.Google Scholar
Industrial Biotechnology Association (1990). Survey of State Government Legislation on Biotechnology. Washington, DC: Industrial Biotechnology Association.Google Scholar
Industrial Biotechnology Association (1992). Year-End Survey of State Government Legislation on Biotechnology, 1991. Washington, DC: Industrial Biotechnology Association.Google Scholar
Industrial Biotechnology Association (1993). Biotechnology Legislation Enacted or Considered by the 102nd Congress. Washington, DC: Industrial Biotechnology Association.Google Scholar
Naisbitt, J. and Aburdene, P. (1990). Megatrends 2000. New York: William Morrow.Google Scholar
Nathan, R.P. (1990). “Federalism—The Great ‘Composition.”’ In King, A., (ed.), The New American Political System, Second Version. Washington, DC: AEI Press.Google Scholar
Nelkin, D. and Tancredi, L. (1989). Dangerous Diagnostics: The Social Power of Biological Information. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
North Carolina Biotechnology Center (1990). Advisory Committee on Biotechnology in Agriculture: Process, Conclusions, Legislation and Regulations. Research Triangle Park, NC: North Carolina Biotechnology Center.Google Scholar
Office of Science and Technology Policy (1986). “Coordinated Framework for Regulation of Biotechnology.” Federal Register 51, no. 123(June 26):23302–50.Google Scholar
Office of Science and Technology Policy. Biotechnology Science Coordinating Committee (1989). Draft Options paper of “The Scope of Organisms to Be Included in Oversight for Planned Introductions of Organisms into the Environment.” November 9.Google Scholar
Office of Technology Assessment (1986). Technology, Public Policy, and the Changing Structure of Agriculture. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.Google Scholar
Office of Technology Assessment (1988). New Developments in Biotechnology: U.S. Investment in Biotechnology. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.Google Scholar
Office of Technology Assessment (1991). Biotechnology in a Global Economy. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.Google Scholar
Plein, L.C. (1990). “Biotechnology: Issue Development and Evolution.” In Webber, D.J, (ed.), Biotechnology: Assessing Social Impacts and Policy Implications. Westport, CT: Greenwood.Google Scholar
Plein, L.C. and Webber, D.J. (1988). “Congressional Consideration of Biotechnology.” Policy Studies Journal 17:136–47.Google Scholar
Plein, L.C. and Webber, D.J. (1989). “Biotechnology and Agriculture: An Evolving Congressional Policy Arena.” In Kramer, C., (ed.), The Political Economy of U.S. Agriculture: Choices for the 1990s. Washington, DC: Resources for the Future.Google Scholar
Portz, J. and Eisinger, P. (1991). “Biotechnology and Economic Development: The Role of the States.” Politics and the Life Sciences 9:225–37.Google Scholar
Regens, J.L. (1989). “Acid Rain Policymaking and Environmental Federalism: Recent Developments, Future Prospects,” Publius 19:75–91.Google Scholar
Robinson, D.B. and Judd, D.R. (1989). The Development of American Public Policy: The Structure of Policy Restraint. Glenview, IL: Scott, Foresman/Little Brown.Google Scholar
Walker, D.B. (1981). Toward a Functioning Federalism. Cambridge, MA: Winthrop Publishers.Google Scholar
Webber, D.J., ed. (1990a). Biotechnology: Assessing Social Impacts and Policy Implications. Westport, CT: Greenwood.Google Scholar
Webber, D.J. (1990b). “Biotechnology Policy Knowledge: A Challenge to Congressional Policy-makers and Policy Analysts.” In Webber, D.J, (ed.), Biotechnology: Assessing Social Impacts and Policy Implications. Westport, CT: Greenwood.Google Scholar
Welborn, D.M. (1988). “Conjoint Federalism and Environmental Regulation.” Publius 18:27–43.Google Scholar
Wisconsin Bio Business (1990). “BST Ban—Minor Effects Foreseen.” June. University of Wisconsin Biotechnology Center.Google Scholar