top of page

Initial Proposal

Jordan Clark

ENC 1102

Dr. Taylor

Initial Research Proposal

Genetically Modified Organism policies: Is there more to it?

Many would say that there are a lot of similarities when it comes to the United States and the European Union, if this is the case, why are their views on Genetically Modified Organisms so polarizing?  With that being said, many scientist have agreed that although there is no concrete evidence proving GMOs’ are hazardous, there “…is a need to assess their potential adverse effects on human[s], as well on the environment.”( Amin, Zainol, Rusly, Akpoviriand, Sidik “Risk assessment of genetically modified organisms (GMOs)”). Even so, there seems to be very limited regulations of genetically engineered food within the United States in comparison to other countries. For example, The United States “FDA determined that labeling [GMO products] was not required on the basis of the method of food production (i.e. genetic engineering), but only if the new food itself posed safety problems for consumers” (Lynch, Logel, The Regulation of GMOs in Europe and the United States: A Case-Study of Contemporary European Regulatory Politics). In contrast, the European Union addresses the potential risks of GMOs by holding others responsible for possible damages. For example, “…people planting GMOs can be held liable for damages to organic farmers harvest in the European Union (EU) (c.f. Koch 2007) or internationally for any ‘‘possible damage caused by the imported GMOs’’ by the exporting party (Kuala Lumpur– Nagoya Supplementary Protocol 2011)” (Robaey “Looking for Moral Responsibility in Ownership: A Way to Deal with Hazards of GMOs”). If this is the case, why do similar societies differ so much when it comes to what is put into the food of its people?

 

           Thus the question I seek to answer is why, in comparisons to other countries, does the United States overlook the potential health risks of genetically modified organisms? The investigation of this question provides further insight into the role that GMOs play in the United States government and society. By answering this question, opposing audiences will be able to see the importance of GMOs or lack thereof, despite potential human and environmental risks involved in genetically engineered organisms. Thus, I am concerned with exploring both the advantages and disadvantages of genetically modified organisms in American culture.

 

                        Although my topic question has occasionally been addressed, it has failed to get the attention that it rightly deserves. This may be the case due to the big power players involved in this topic of conversation. These players include one of the biggest companies, Monsanto and the United States governments. Since these big powers have a lot to lose or gain depending on the answer to my question, it seems as though these power houses do not want to gamble on something that hasn’t been proven wrong. Regardless of the reason these giant players do not gamble their influence on American population for the potential better, I believe they are the reason my question has yet to be resolved.

 

            Target audiences that this paper may concern are those who question the relaxed GMO policies placed by the United States government. Such as those both within the engineered organisms discourse and those outside of the community. Within this discourse community people can use the answers to this question to further support their claims. Such as in arguments who believe it is ethically wrong to genetically modify anything due to such hazardous risks or even for ethical concerns. They can use the information I’ve gathered to provide further insight into their argument by mentioning a different perspective of the same topic while still supporting their own. Others outside of this discourse community but who it directly effects is food companies who sell GMO products to the people such as Wal-Mart, Publix and Target. There is  also the general American public who wants to know more about the government regulated products they use and consume on a daily bases.

 

            As a result, my research will give insights on the various advantages and disadvantages of genetically modified organisms. Also, it will cover the concerns and controversies relating to GMOs. Investigating further into research on genetically modified organism will shed light about how it’s being regulated and government policies that concern it. My topic will also get more people involved in a topic that directly targets them. Even so, what I hope to learn about this topic is exactly what I want to teach others, what exactly are genetically modified organisms and how do they affect our lives. Also, if how the government effects our food supply is for the better or other factor outside of North America’s best interest.

Annotated Bibliography 

Jordan Clark

ENC 1102

Dr. Taylor

Annotated Bibliography

 

Works Cited

 

Blanchard, Krystle B. "Regent University Law Review." THE HAZARDS OF GMOS: SCIENTIFIC REASONS WHY THEY SHOULD BE REGULATED, POLITICAL REASONS WHY THEY ARE NOT, AND LEGAL ANSWERS TO WHAT SHOULD BE DONE 27 (n.d.): n. pag. EBSCO. Web. 13 Mar. 2015. As the title suggest, this article discusses the reasons why GMOs should be regulated. From this article I will mostly be using the political reasons as to why they are not closely managed. This will contribute to answering the part of my question that asks why the United States government doesn’t overlook GMO regulation closer. From this article I will also use their research to discuss the disadvantages of GMOs specifically regarding the biodiversity of plants. Such could provide great inference as to answering why the government doesn't regulate GMOs the way they should.

 

Goldbas, Abbie. "International Journal of Childbirth Education." GMOs: What Are They? 29.3 (2014): n. pag. EBSCO. Web. This article explains what exactly GMOs are and the general advantages and disadvantages involving developed organisms. Some of those advantages include the use of medicines and foods and their relation to plants. The disadvantage also includes some medicines and the genetically engineered portion to foods and plants. I will use this article to explain to my audience the basics of genetically modified organisms. I will also use this article to explain the different places that GMOs can be found. This article will help my paper support the disadvantages and advantages of GMOs within society. It will help answer the question of if it’s necessary to closely regulate genetically modified organisms.

 

Levidow, Les, Susan Carr, and David Wield. "Genetically Modified Crops in the European Union: Regulatory Conflicts as Precautionary Opportunities." Journal of Risk Research 3.3 (2000): 189-208. Web. Lveidow, Carr and Wield discuss the response to the EU government doing something about GMOs. They mention the knowledge of the EU governments’ citizens on GMOs upon the newly developed bean reaching their countries. It also discusses the governments’ current involvement with GMOs. I will use this information to compare to the United States regulation and explain which EU nations use GMOs.

 

Lynch, Diahanna, and David Vogel. "The Regulation of GMOs in Europe and the United States: A Case-Study of Contemporary European Regulatory Politics." Council on Foreign Relations. Council on Foreign Relations, 5 Apr. 2001. Web. 14 Mar. 2015. Lynch and Vogel discuss why the European Union and America decided to go separate ways in terms of dealing with GMOs. It discusses why the EU is far more restricting when compared to that if the United States. I will use these facts to contribute to the regulation part of my question involving how and why the different governments regulate GMOs so differently.

 

Onusic, Sylvia P., PHD. "The Current Status of GMO's in Europe." FarmtoConsumer Legal Defense Fund News RSS. N.p., 19 Sept. 2012. Web. 20 Apr. 2015. Onusic discusses the differences in how the EU and America regulates GMOs. She includes the history of GMOs in Europe and how it resulted in the strictest regulation of GMOs in the world. Although her article in general is slightly biased toward how the EU regulates GMOs, her facts prove relevant to my question. I will use the information she’s gathered to discuss how the European Union regulates GMOs.

 

"Restrictions on Genetically Modified Organisms: United States." Library of Congress. N.p., 2 Apr. 2015. Web. 20 Apr. 2015. This government site discusses the detail of how the different government agencies regulate GMOs. Those two agencies include the EPA and the FDA. The EPA focuses on how modified organisms effect the environment while the FDA focuses on how the GMOs effect food throughout America. I will use this information to explain how the American government regulates GMOs. This will contribute to the comparison part of question that involves both how the EU and America government regulates GMOs.

Genre and Stockholder Analysis

Jordan Clark

ENC 1102

Dr. Taylor

Stakeholder Analysis

            In order to seek the answer to a question or to change something, people have to ask questions. My question concerning the government and why they overlook health risk concerning genetically modified organisms is no different. The people who seek to challenge the regulation of genetically modified organisms come from many different backgrounds and in many different forms. Some of these groups of interest include the general American public, farmers forced to adopt GM seed methods, companies with modified organisms in their foods, the scientist within the GMO discourse community and the media.

 

            In reference to the general American public being a stakeholder I mean to refer to those who want to know about the negative stigma behind GMOs since it’s in medicines, foods and other consumable goods within the American market. These people are stakeholders because they are the ones being effected against the lax regulation of genetically modified organisms within the United States. From research I’ve gathered many Americans do not agree with the GMOs in goods that they consume because of their questionability in terms of health. Therefore, many Americans would be interested in this question because they want to know why their voices or not being heard and why their government would be so relaxed on the use of something that has the potential to have health defects. In response to my finding, the American public can not only educate themselves on what GMOs are but, with my findings, begin questioning both the government and the reasons as to why the government the government overlook such policies.

 

            Another audience member who wants to know why American government policies are overlooked in comparison to other countries is another group who is directly affected by government decision, farmers. Since it isn’t as hard to acquire an abundance of genetically modified seeds, it is often used with GMO companies like Monsanto. With the mass production of such GMO seeds, it’s harder for small time farmers to compete. Thus, many farmers who have not or could not adopt such methods have lost a lot of business or in some cases have shut down. Therefore, many of these people could be stakeholders in order to get answers as to why their livelihood was taken from them. In response to my question, these farmers can begin to respond to the government about their situation with more insight into the perspective of their government opponents.

 

            Companies would also be an audience that my paper is referring to about the lenient policies in government GMO regulation. By companies, I mean those who have genetically modified organisms within their goods. Such companies are stakeholders because depending on the answer, it can directly affect their business either for the better or the worse. They would be interested in knowing the motives behind GMO government regulation simply because the public and the people who consume their company foods would be interested. In response to my findings, these companies can begin to match demand by either boycotting GMO companies like Monsanto or selling more of their foods. Some of the companies who may be interested in this include Wal-Mart, Publix and Target.

 

            The next audience that I would be referring to is the scientist within the GMO community. The scientist who have researched GMOs and have weighed in either their pros, cons or both. These researchers would be stakeholders because regardless of their results, it could skew the overall discourse conversation at hand. Especially so since there has not been proof about GMOs actually being bad for consumers, only potential risks. They’d have particular interest in relaxed government oversight because they have the results proving or disproving the government motives. With such information, they can either back up their claims or discredit another’s conclusion when taking the factual results public. For example, the reason for the government’s lack of labeling GMO products can support the pros to a scientist results.

 

            The last audience member who would be vital to my audience include the American media. Overall people do not have a good enough amount of general 

information on the topic of GMOs. Although people may have heard of it or may think it is bad, they do not really know the proper details that they should know about the foods they eat. Since the media is one of the biggest influences on public opinion, due to the fact that they give out information,  they could help get the word out about the potential harms that GMOs can do to them and the environment.

Genre Analysis

            Often the general public get their information from news outlets either on the television or the internet. Farmers do not communicate much differently, they also use the internet to specifically go on agricultural sites like Agweb, which deals with everything agriculture from farming tips to the business involved in farming. This site even provides a forum for farmers and those a part of the discourse to communicate. Besides sites like this, farmers would also get their news from farming magazines like Acres U.S.A. that talk about the science of farming including those involving chemicals.

 

            With companies having such a professional setting involving meetings, often they’d get their information through presentations and emails. In order to convince such business people, a good speaker is required along with really good sources and an overall good presentation format. Scientist often read and write up scholarly journals and along with collaborate with each other to gather information. Thus, it is these peer reviewed scholarly journals that most scientist will find to be convincing.

 

            After further researching about my topics, I decided to go with American businesses and the Unites States farmers. These two groups are important to my subject

because they have a more direct influence on the GMO products that the American public uses. By discussing with companies what they sell their consumers and the potential negative effects of GMOs, it could make them take a stance on the conversation and use their power for what they believe is in their consumer’s best interest. Farmers are also important because they are the only ones that can truly vouch for what they put in their food, therefore holding a portion of responsibility to what they feed to the public. With GMO regulation being overlooked by the government some farmers are forced to either run out of business or start using modified organisms.  Since GMOs contain a potential health risk, some farmers may not to use engineered organisms but simply do not have a choice. Therefore, I feel like both of these parties benefit most from my research because with it, they can begin to focus their efforts on attacking the reason for lack of government regulation policies, if deemed necessary. They also both hold the power to inform the public about government GMO policies on a bigger scale.

 

            As mentioned before, many companies have a very professional setting when it comes to their business. Most of the texts that they use include emails, reports and other professional looking documents. Most professionals get their information from reliable sources based on the research of employees. Receiving this reliable information is vital to the performance of a company, so the resources that companies uses must be genuine and authentic. Thus, I believe the best way to communicate to business people is through meetings and PowerPoints presentation using reliable sources. Power points would be best when communicating with business people at professional meetings because through presentation one can not only present their information but convince people of the point they’re trying to make. The presentations are usually held in spacious rooms with a large open table, comfortable seats and a dry erase board or a projector. Usually the presentations include graphs and facts displaying the point of the presenter. The overall professional meeting communication method that businesses use provide a very clear look at the information being presents, benefitting both the presenter and the audience.

 

            After going over how farmers exchange information, I think it would be best to communicate with farmers by posting an article on one of the agricultural sites owned by The Farm Journal such as AgriTalk. AgriTalk, discusses the problems and issues that many farmers alike share. This site is designed like that of a blog, so I would organize my research as according to that format. Although I assume most farmers know what GMOs are I would briefly mention a description discussing GMOs to avoid potential confusion. Second, I would mention how other countries deal with GMOs. I would then include the reasons as to why the government overlooks regulation of modified organisms I comparison to other countries. As you can see, unlike the information I would give out to the general public, I would not give a list of pros and cons to farmers. I would assume most farmers already have an opinion, therefore I’d pitch them an objective argument so focus is not lost on the government. To validate my argument, I’d also link sources to the end of my post to make it easier for audience members to research on their own.

bottom of page