科技理性与制度理性的双重变奏——基于转基因食品的风险决策

Abstract
Figure/Table
References
Related Citation (2)

Download: PDF (1007 KB) HTML (1 KB)
Export: BibTeX | EndNote (RIS)

Abstract The risk problem in genetically modified food includes the dual aspects of fact judgment and value judgment.When the risk cannot be reduced to zero objectively,risk decision-making needs to seek the “golden section”between safety and damage in order to realize the transition from sci-tech rationality to social justice.Cost-benefit analysis seems to be able to provide an objective basis for risk decision-making.But at the same time,it also faces the criticism of “the incommensurability of different interests”.This question is established on a philosophical level,but it is difficult to justify in reality.In fact,any attempt to find a cardinal scale simplifies the measurement of interests.The birth of residual risk comes from human nature,and its trend should also depend on human nature.The risk decision of genetically modified food requires institutional rationality to ease the tension between sci-tech rationality and risk uncertainty,combining value sequence with specific situation,and making final decision through the model of public participation.

Key words： Genetically modified food Sci-tech rationality Institutional rationality Cost-benefit analysis 1

Received: 16 December 2020

PACS:

D922.16

	Service

	E-mail this article
	Add to my bookshelf
	Add to citation manager
	E-mail Alert
	RSS
	Articles by authors
	Yu Han

Cite this article:

Yu Han. The Double Variation of Sci-Tech Rationality and Institutional Rationality ——Risk decision Based on Genetically Modified Food[J]. , 2021, 2(10): 25-30.

URL:

http://www.zgkjlt.org.cn/EN/ OR http://www.zgkjlt.org.cn/EN/Y2021/V2/I10/25

[1]MESSER E.Food systems and dietary perspective:are genetically modified organisms the best way to ensure nutritionally adequate food[J].Indiana journal of global legal studies,2001,9 (1):66.
[2]BEAUDOIN K S.On tonight's menu:toasted cornbread with firefly genes adapting food labeling law to consumer protection needs in the biotech century[J].Marquette law review,1999,83 (1):243-249.
[3]司汉武.制度理性与社会秩序[M].北京:知识产权出版社,2011:221-222.
[4]陈莹莹.中国转基因食品安全风险规制研究[J].华南师范大学学报 (社会科学版),2018 (4):122.
[5]MELLON M.Transcript:public regulation of biotechnology (or not)[J].Vermont law review,2013,37 (4):1074.
[6]SMITH J M.Seeds of deception:exposing industry and government lies about the safety of the genetically engineered foods you're eating[M].Hartford:Chelsea Green Publishing,2003:38.
[7]陈志龙.基因改造食品之论争、定位与刑事法规范[J].月旦法学杂志,2004 (112):124-125.
[8]SZKARTAT M A.The contribution of genetically modified food to the realisation of the right to adequate food[J].Nordic journal of human rights,2013,31 (1):21.
[9]陈小文.行政法的哲学基础[M].北京:北京大学出版社,2009:136.
[10]金自宁.风险中的行政法[M].北京:法律出版社,2014:48.
[11]程明修.行政法上之风险评估与管理[J].台湾法学杂志,2009 (142):4.
[12]VISCUSI W.The benefits of mortality risk reduction:happiness surveys vs.the value of statistical life[J].Duke law journal,2013,62 (8):1735.
[13]郭婕,王华梅.福利经济学派伦理思想评价——从生态正义角度的探析[M].太原:山西经济出版社,2014:114.
[14]陈景辉.面对转基因问题的法律态度——法律人应当如何思考科学问题[J].法学,2015 (9):126-128.
[15]食品安全标准与监测评估司.卫生部等7部门关于撤销食品添加剂过氧化苯甲酰、过氧化钙的公告[EB/OL]..http://www.nhc.gov.cn/sps/s7891/201103/b24445ba709848e8b98d3871d66507ab.shtml.
[16]THOMPSON P B.Should we have gm crops[J].Santa clara journal of international law,2006,4 (1):75.
[17]伏创宇.核能规制与行政法体系的变革[M].北京:北京大学出版社,2017:60.
[18]金自宁.风险规制与行政法治[J].法制与社会发展,2012,18 (4):69.
[19]金自宁.风险规制与行政法[M].北京:法律出版社,2012:240.