Inclusive development and prioritization of review questions in a highly controversial field of regulatory science Neal Haddaway, Sally Crowe: wis

Armin Spök, Monica Racovita, Sandra Karner, Gloria Adduci, Greet Smets, Patrick Rüdelsheim, Christian Kohl, Ralf Wilhelm, Joachim Schiemann

Publikation: Beitrag in einer FachzeitschriftReview eines Fachbereichs (Review article)ForschungBegutachtung

Abstract

How to best assess potential health, environmental and other impacts of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) and how to interpret the resulting evidence base have been long-standing controversial issues in the EU. As a response, transparency and inclusiveness became a major focus of regulatory science activities in the GMO impact area. Nevertheless, nearly three decades of controversies resulted in a heavily polarized policy environment, calling for further efforts. Against this backdrop the EU funded project GRACE explored the value of evidence synthesis approaches for GMO impact assessment and developed an evidence synthesis framework with a strong emphasis on openness, stakeholder engagement, transparency, and responsiveness to tackle regulatory science challenges. This framework was tested and implemented in the course of 14 systematic reviews or maps conducted on selected review questions spanning potential health, environmental, and socioeconomic impacts of GMOs. An inclusive development and prioritisation of review questions is of key importance in evidence synthesis as it helps to provide a better link between stakeholder demands and concerns and policy relevant outcomes. This paper, therefore, places a particular focus on the stakeholder involvement strategy developed and experiences gathered during this particular step in the course of the GRACE project. Based on this experience, possible lessons for future engagement exercises in highly controversial fields of regulatory science are discussed.

Originalspracheenglisch
Aufsatznummer1
FachzeitschriftEnvironmental Evidence
Jahrgang7
DOIs
PublikationsstatusVeröffentlicht - 12 Jan 2018

Fingerprint

genetically modified organism
prioritization
Transparency
stakeholder
GRACE
Health
transparency
socioeconomic impact
health impact
environmental impact
science
policy
project

Schlagwörter

    ASJC Scopus subject areas

    • Ökologie
    • !!Management, Monitoring, Policy and Law

    Fields of Expertise

    • Human- & Biotechnology

    Dies zitieren

    Inclusive development and prioritization of review questions in a highly controversial field of regulatory science Neal Haddaway, Sally Crowe : wis. / Spök, Armin; Racovita, Monica; Karner, Sandra; Adduci, Gloria; Smets, Greet; Rüdelsheim, Patrick; Kohl, Christian; Wilhelm, Ralf; Schiemann, Joachim.

    in: Environmental Evidence, Jahrgang 7, 1, 12.01.2018.

    Publikation: Beitrag in einer FachzeitschriftReview eines Fachbereichs (Review article)ForschungBegutachtung

    Spök, Armin ; Racovita, Monica ; Karner, Sandra ; Adduci, Gloria ; Smets, Greet ; Rüdelsheim, Patrick ; Kohl, Christian ; Wilhelm, Ralf ; Schiemann, Joachim. / Inclusive development and prioritization of review questions in a highly controversial field of regulatory science Neal Haddaway, Sally Crowe : wis. in: Environmental Evidence. 2018 ; Jahrgang 7.
    @article{92ca912cb4d74e6f9fd4bc1c0c9d3a9f,
    title = "Inclusive development and prioritization of review questions in a highly controversial field of regulatory science Neal Haddaway, Sally Crowe: wis",
    abstract = "How to best assess potential health, environmental and other impacts of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) and how to interpret the resulting evidence base have been long-standing controversial issues in the EU. As a response, transparency and inclusiveness became a major focus of regulatory science activities in the GMO impact area. Nevertheless, nearly three decades of controversies resulted in a heavily polarized policy environment, calling for further efforts. Against this backdrop the EU funded project GRACE explored the value of evidence synthesis approaches for GMO impact assessment and developed an evidence synthesis framework with a strong emphasis on openness, stakeholder engagement, transparency, and responsiveness to tackle regulatory science challenges. This framework was tested and implemented in the course of 14 systematic reviews or maps conducted on selected review questions spanning potential health, environmental, and socioeconomic impacts of GMOs. An inclusive development and prioritisation of review questions is of key importance in evidence synthesis as it helps to provide a better link between stakeholder demands and concerns and policy relevant outcomes. This paper, therefore, places a particular focus on the stakeholder involvement strategy developed and experiences gathered during this particular step in the course of the GRACE project. Based on this experience, possible lessons for future engagement exercises in highly controversial fields of regulatory science are discussed.",
    keywords = "Evidence synthesis, GMO impact assessment, GMO risk assessment, Inclusiveness, Prioritization of review questions, Stakeholder involvement, Systematic reviews, Transparency",
    author = "Armin Sp{\"o}k and Monica Racovita and Sandra Karner and Gloria Adduci and Greet Smets and Patrick R{\"u}delsheim and Christian Kohl and Ralf Wilhelm and Joachim Schiemann",
    year = "2018",
    month = "1",
    day = "12",
    doi = "10.1186/s13750-017-0113-z",
    language = "English",
    volume = "7",
    journal = "Environmental Evidence",
    issn = "2047-2382",
    publisher = "BioMed Central",

    }

    TY - JOUR

    T1 - Inclusive development and prioritization of review questions in a highly controversial field of regulatory science Neal Haddaway, Sally Crowe

    T2 - wis

    AU - Spök, Armin

    AU - Racovita, Monica

    AU - Karner, Sandra

    AU - Adduci, Gloria

    AU - Smets, Greet

    AU - Rüdelsheim, Patrick

    AU - Kohl, Christian

    AU - Wilhelm, Ralf

    AU - Schiemann, Joachim

    PY - 2018/1/12

    Y1 - 2018/1/12

    N2 - How to best assess potential health, environmental and other impacts of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) and how to interpret the resulting evidence base have been long-standing controversial issues in the EU. As a response, transparency and inclusiveness became a major focus of regulatory science activities in the GMO impact area. Nevertheless, nearly three decades of controversies resulted in a heavily polarized policy environment, calling for further efforts. Against this backdrop the EU funded project GRACE explored the value of evidence synthesis approaches for GMO impact assessment and developed an evidence synthesis framework with a strong emphasis on openness, stakeholder engagement, transparency, and responsiveness to tackle regulatory science challenges. This framework was tested and implemented in the course of 14 systematic reviews or maps conducted on selected review questions spanning potential health, environmental, and socioeconomic impacts of GMOs. An inclusive development and prioritisation of review questions is of key importance in evidence synthesis as it helps to provide a better link between stakeholder demands and concerns and policy relevant outcomes. This paper, therefore, places a particular focus on the stakeholder involvement strategy developed and experiences gathered during this particular step in the course of the GRACE project. Based on this experience, possible lessons for future engagement exercises in highly controversial fields of regulatory science are discussed.

    AB - How to best assess potential health, environmental and other impacts of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) and how to interpret the resulting evidence base have been long-standing controversial issues in the EU. As a response, transparency and inclusiveness became a major focus of regulatory science activities in the GMO impact area. Nevertheless, nearly three decades of controversies resulted in a heavily polarized policy environment, calling for further efforts. Against this backdrop the EU funded project GRACE explored the value of evidence synthesis approaches for GMO impact assessment and developed an evidence synthesis framework with a strong emphasis on openness, stakeholder engagement, transparency, and responsiveness to tackle regulatory science challenges. This framework was tested and implemented in the course of 14 systematic reviews or maps conducted on selected review questions spanning potential health, environmental, and socioeconomic impacts of GMOs. An inclusive development and prioritisation of review questions is of key importance in evidence synthesis as it helps to provide a better link between stakeholder demands and concerns and policy relevant outcomes. This paper, therefore, places a particular focus on the stakeholder involvement strategy developed and experiences gathered during this particular step in the course of the GRACE project. Based on this experience, possible lessons for future engagement exercises in highly controversial fields of regulatory science are discussed.

    KW - Evidence synthesis

    KW - GMO impact assessment

    KW - GMO risk assessment

    KW - Inclusiveness

    KW - Prioritization of review questions

    KW - Stakeholder involvement

    KW - Systematic reviews

    KW - Transparency

    UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85040765452&partnerID=8YFLogxK

    U2 - 10.1186/s13750-017-0113-z

    DO - 10.1186/s13750-017-0113-z

    M3 - Review article

    VL - 7

    JO - Environmental Evidence

    JF - Environmental Evidence

    SN - 2047-2382

    M1 - 1

    ER -