While it is possible to demonstrate a
risk, by
measuring
the harm
caused by a
given hazard
in a given
environment,
it is
conversely
impossible
to
demonstrate
the
absence
of risk in a
really
convincing
way, as no
empirical
proof of the
absence
of something
can be
obtained !
In such a
circumstance,
demonstrating
the zero-risk
is not a
reasonable
demand
before
deciding to
license or
not the
marketing of
a new
product.
Instead, the
acceptability
of a risk (actual
or potential)
will have to
be
determined.
In this
respect,
scientific
acceptability
and social
acceptability
are two
different
things.
For the
scientist,
the
acceptance
of a risk
will first
be stated
when the
occurrence
of severe
and/or
irreversible
damage to
health and
the
environment
may
reasonably
be ruled
out, based
on the
latest
scientific
information.
Further, it
will depend
on a
comparison
between the
actual and
potential
harms caused
by the
innovation
with those
caused by
the existing
technical
scenarios
that the
innovation
intends to
substitute.
To make it
clear,
assessing a
transgenic
plant with
insect
resistance
as a new
trait will
be done by
comparing
the
environmental
consequences
of using
this plant
with the
consequences
of using the
chemical
insecticides
that are
needed when
a plant is
non
transgenic,
hence
susceptible
to the pest.
Scientific
risk
assessment
thus needs
so-called «
comparators
», i.e.
widely-used
practices
with which
the
innovation
may be
compared.
Discussions
are ongoing
for the
proper
identification
of these
comparators
in the EU
risk
assessment
procedure.
For lay
persons,
social
acceptability
is even more
complex, as
it is bound
to values
and norms,
hence
subjective
in the sense
that human
communities
and
individuals
may have
contrasting
appraisals
of the
innovation.
In order to
make the
innovation
socially
acceptable,
the informed
consent of
the consumer
must be
seeked. This
demands a
sound
information
on the new
product and
an
appropriate
labelling
system.
Efforts
within the
EU on the
traceability
and
labelling of
GMOs are
directed
towards
these aims,
but public
education to
science and
technology
is essential
for making
the
innovation
understandable.
