Bt Research 2025, Vol.16, No.6, 259-268 http://microbescipublisher.com/index.php/bt 262 "product orientation" and scientific basis. The process is open, and approval must be passed before listing. After listing, continuous monitoring is still required. Public participation has not been neglected either. Although sometimes the effect is limited, at least there is a "place to speak" (Li and You, 2025). However, this system is not without its drawbacks. Cross-institutional communication often becomes a bottleneck, and public concerns about GMO have not completely subsided. Overall, however, the approach of the United States, which emphasizes clear responsibilities and attaches importance to scientific assessment, has indeed facilitated the smooth commercialization of genetically modified crops such as corn and cotton, and the environmental and economic benefits are also supported by data (Menz et al., 2020; Turnbull et al., 2021). Moreover, it has a relatively high tolerance for new technologies. Emerging tools like CRISPR are gradually being brought under regulatory scrutiny and will not be held back by the old system. 3.2 The european union’s approval process under the precautionary principle When it comes to the European Union, one cannot fail to mention its consistent caution. Unlike the US approach of "assess first, then release", the EU prefers "Don't rush. Let's see if there are any uncertainties first." This approach that takes the "precautionary principle" as the bottom line has made its Bt crop approval process extremely complicated. EFSA conducts risk assessment, the European Commission makes the decision, and member states still have a say. It sounds democratic, but it is indeed slow in practice (Qaim, 2020). All necessary reviews were conducted, and environmental protection, health, and non-target species were all on the list. Transparency was also sufficient, but the process was repeatedly delayed, and many Bt crops simply failed to enter the market. This regulatory approach is not entirely the EU's own business. It has a significant impact on global GMO regulation, and many countries refer to its path when formulating policies. However, precisely because of this conservatism, the EU and the US have been constantly in trade frictions and are often criticized for being "overly cautious and suppressing innovation". However, then again, it does capture one key point: environmental protection and consumer confidence, which are more important than business efficiency in the European context (Eckerstorfer et al., 2019). 3.3 Regulatory policies and approval procedures in developing countries (e.g., China, India) Among developing countries, the situations of China and India are quite representative, but the paths they follow are quite different. In China, the commercialization of Bt crops has been advancing relatively rapidly. Cotton and corn have already been approved. In terms of supervision, both scientific assessment and agricultural policy goals are taken into consideration. However, there are also many problems. For instance, the approval process is sometimes not transparent enough and the public acceptance also needs to be improved. At present, China is simplifying procedures and enhancing information disclosure, hoping to promote Bt crops to play a greater role in food security and sustainable agriculture. In India, although Bt cotton has been grown in the fields for many years, the approval of other Bt food crops has almost come to a standstill. Despite the intense policy controversy, heated social discussion and considerable public opinion pressure, even if the scientific assessment has been passed, it still gets stuck at the threshold of "public opinion" (Navneet, 2019). Supervision is not without responsibility, and institutions like GEAC are also in operation. However, due to the lack of clear rights and responsibilities and efficient processes, many new Bt crops have been unable to be promoted for a long time. If regulatory capabilities are not enhanced and information communication with the public is not improved, this situation where "science is there but policies are not implemented" will be hard to change. This also indicates that for developing countries to promote genetically modified crops, they cannot rely solely on assessment models; instead, they need a set of down-to-earth institutional support measures.
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MjQ4ODYzNA==