REGULATING BIOSAFETY OF GENETICALLY MODIFIED CROPS IN INDONESIA: LIMITS AND CHALLENGES

The global use of genetically modified (GM) crops is rapidly expanding. While the advent of this agricultural biotechnology offers new promises to cater to the rising demand for Indonesia’s food security, the government should ensure its safety. This paper examines the regulatory regime over biosafety in Indonesia by considering the global fragmentation of biosafety regulation that debates its impact on environmental and health aspects. After Indonesia ratified the Convention on Biological Diversity and the Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety, which both specifically become the global guideline on how domestic biosafety policies are regulated, environmental and health issues are among the priorities which the use of GM crops contests to the precautionary approach. Amidst the insufficient scientific ground on its safety, GM crops' use is supposed to result in adverse impacts, and the suspicion over the safety of such a new cutting-edge agricultural technology ended with a series of rejections. This paper's results reveal that amongst the global contention over the regulatory regime on biosafety, which resulted in the bifurcation of the biosafety regulation, Indonesia has added to the new polarization. This polarization includes the release of GM crops certification, and Indonesia's desire to regulating biosafety deliberates over the definition and translation of biosafety in the domestic regulatory regime against the global regulatory diversity of biosafety.

Disharmonized the Regulation of Biological Resources and its Ecosystem in Indonesia

The goal of state control over natural resources is an anticipatory step to avoid the widest possible use by individuals or legal entities as a means of oppression and exploitation of others. However, in reality, many regulations overlap and are not in harmony with one another. The author of this study uses normative juridical research. The definition of normative juridical is a type of research that emphasizes more on library research, where the materials used will be obtained from laws, literature, mass media, which are related to writing materials. This study found that the arrangement of living natural resources in Indonesia that is less harmonious is: a. Law Number 21 of 2004 concerning Ratification of the Cartagena Protocol On Biosafety To The Convention On Biological Diversity and b. Constitutional Court Decision No.35/PUU-X/2012.

The supply chain of Brazilian maize and soybeans: the effects of segregation on logistics and competitiveness

Despite the significant advances of Brazilian agriculture, transportation and storage costs still constitute the main barriers to the Brazilian agribusiness. The aim of this article is to analyze the effect of segregation of maize and soybeans in the Brazilian transport and storage logistics, especially genetically modified grains. In the context of the guidelines of the Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety (CPB) as well as of the competitiveness in the international market, we develop a spatial equilibrium model in the form of a mixed complementarity problem. The competitiveness of Brazilian maize and soybeans on the international market is compromised by the inefficient logistics and slow responses to the demands of the CPB. The contribution of the paper is to evaluate how regulatory issues of a segment, in this case biotechnology, may interfere with logistic infrastructure projects.

Malaysia Biosafety Act 2007 and Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety: A critical comparative analysis

Advancement of modern biotechnology has wide impact on various industries. Modern biotechnology in the past has gone unregulated but the responsible use of biotechnology is the main focus worldwide. The most important living modified organisms (LMOs) regulatory framework is the Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety. This Protocol provides guidelines for the national legal framework. This paper aimed to perform comparative studies on Malaysia Biosafety Act 2007 and the Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety. The results show that while certain clauses in the Protocol are highly similar, and some proviso in the Biosafety Act 2007 are broader in scope, and conversely, certain clauses of the Protocol are well reflected in the Biosafety Act 2007. It is submitted that in overall perspective, Biosafety Act 2007 is consistent with the Protocol. It is concluded that Malaysia biosafety regulation system satisfies this international requirement. However, with regards to enforcement of this Act, it remains unanswered, as no precedent has been reported. Interestingly, non-compliance of some proviso in the Biosafety Act 2007 will result in criminal penalty, and its impacts on the research and development in the biotechnology industry, commercial investment from abroad and domestic markets, and international trading of LMOs as food and feed, remain to be seen.

Malaysia Biosafety Act 2007 and Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety: A critical comparative analysis

Advancement of modern biotechnology has wide impact on various industries. Modern biotechnology in the past has gone unregulated but the responsible use of biotechnology is the main focus worldwide. The most important living modified organisms (LMOs) regulatory framework is the Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety. This Protocol provides guidelines for the national legal framework. This paper aimed to perform comparative studies on Malaysia Biosafety Act 2007 and the Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety. The results show that while certain clauses in the Protocol are highly similar, and some proviso in the Biosafety Act 2007 are broader in scope, and conversely, certain clauses of the Protocol are well reflected in the Biosafety Act 2007. It is submitted that in overall perspective, Biosafety Act 2007 is consistent with the Protocol. It is concluded that Malaysia biosafety regulation system satisfies this international requirement. However, with regards to enforcement of this Act, it remains unanswered, as no precedent has been reported. Interestingly, non-compliance of some proviso in the Biosafety Act 2007 will result in criminal penalty, and its impacts on the research and development in the biotechnology industry, commercial investment from abroad and domestic markets, and international trading of LMOs as food and feed, remain to be seen.