Considerations of this nature have often overshadowed the benefits these countries might derive from the application of genetic engineering.

Biosafety and genetically modified organisms (GMOs) are amongst the most complex of biodiversity issues: from species conservation, to sustainable livelihoods, to socio-cultural policy. The greatest GMO-related need shared by all decision-makers - governmental, civil society, and industrial - is for unbiased background information and a framework for evaluating new evidence. This detailed, background analysis aims to enable IUCN and its Members determine how they should "advance leadership, research, analysis and dissemination of knowledge regarding the potential ecological impact of the release of genetically modified organisms into the environment, focusing especially on biodiversity, socio-economic impact and food security".

The challenges for risk identification, assessment and management posed by genetic engineering and genetically modified organisms are some of the most demanding issues facing many countries and societies today. The evolving field of biosafety has developed in response to these challenges. BIOSAFETY FIRST is a stimulating collection of the latest thinking concerning biosafety science. It is a unique work as its approach to biosafety is holistic, encompassing not only the scientific, but also the socio-economic, cultural, policy and regulatory spheres. It does not claim to give all the answers, but acknowledges the issues and points to the uncertainties and knowledge gaps that still need to be addressed. Drawing on the new scientific field of gene ecology, and advocating a precautionary approach, this book provides a foundation on which countries can start to openly and responsibly appraise these new technologies and their products.

Contributed articles.

Gene/biotechnology and the broad use of genetically modified organisms is rapidly developing into a commercial enterprise. In spite of the pace of scientific progress in this field, a partly emotional debate is still being carried on by the general public and on the part of the consumer about the potential risks linked to this new technology. Especially when genetically modified organisms (GMOs) are tested in the open field, the question of "safety" is controversially discussed among different groups in society. Environmentalists are worried about unforeseeable dangers inherent in the release of a living organism, assuming that special risks are linked to organisms which have been modified by molecular biologists using tools developed in the laboratory. Frequently quoted potential hazards are the phenomena of "gene escape" and "genetic pollution", meaning the very interesting question of natural (horizontal) gene transfer. This phenomenon of horizontal gene transfer is in fact well known to scientists studying prokaryotes. Many prokaryotes are able to exchange DNA readily between individuals of different species or are even able to take up DNA from the extracellular environment by the process of genetic transformation, which has already been known for more than 65 years. For eukaryotes, however, the evidence of natural horizontal gene transfer is very limited.

The scientific controversies involving genetic science and ?biosafety? Have not been well understood by many. All claims about GMOs (genetically modified organisms) or LMOs (living modified organisms) are under controversy. The Cartagena Protocol is the first international agreement to regulate the transboundary movement of GMOs. Under the Convention on Biological Diversity, 190 countries agreed on the importance and concern over the spread and cross-border transfer of GMOs and their risks to environment and human health. Consequently, in 2000, they adopted the Cartagena Protocol to address the possible risks of GMOs. The protocol is an important step in the protection of biodiversity and biosafety. The concern of developing countries are not shared by the developed countries like the US, Canada, and Mexico. These countries produce more than 90% of the LMO crops and they are not ratified by the protocol. The protocol explicitly stipulates that countries should take precautionary measures to prevent GMOs from causing harm to biodiversity and human health.Members have to implement the protocol provisions at the domestic level. There are heated debates in India whether to allow the cultivation of GMOs? The civil society organizations are opposing the entry of multinational companies in the field trial of GMOs. In this scenario, a systematic review of the international legal regime to formulate a comprehensive policy on the subject in India is the need of the hour.