The Status under EU Law of Organisms Developed through Novel Genomic Techniques
In a ruling on 25 July 2018, the Court of Justice of the European Union concluded that organisms obtained by means of techniques/methods of mutagenesis constitute GMOs in the sense of Directive 2001/18, and that organisms obtained by means of techniques/methods of directed mutagenesis are not exclud...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | European journal of risk regulation 2023-03, Vol.14 (1), p.93-112 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , , , , , , , , , , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | 112 |
---|---|
container_issue | 1 |
container_start_page | 93 |
container_title | European journal of risk regulation |
container_volume | 14 |
creator | VAN DER MEER, Piet ANGENON, Geert BERGMANS, Hans BUHK, Hans Jörg CALLEBAUT, Sam CHAMON, Merijn ERIKSSON, Dennis GHEYSEN, Godelieve HARWOOD, Wendy HUNDLEBY, Penny KEARNS, Peter MCLOUGHLIN, Thomas ZIMNY, Tomasz |
description | In a ruling on 25 July 2018, the Court of Justice of the European Union concluded that organisms obtained by means of techniques/methods of mutagenesis constitute GMOs in the sense of Directive 2001/18, and that organisms obtained by means of techniques/methods of directed mutagenesis are not excluded from the scope of the Directive. Following the ruling, there has been much debate about the possible wider implications of the ruling. In October 2019, the Council of the European Union requested the European Commission to submit, in light of the CJEU ruling, a study regarding the status of novel genomic techniques under Union Law. For the purpose of the study, the Commission initiated stakeholder consultations early in 2020. Those consultations focused on the technical status of novel genomic techniques. This article aims to contribute to the discussion on the legal status of organisms developed through novel genomic techniques, by offering some historical background to the negotiations on the European Union (EU) GMO Directives as well as a technical context to some of the terms in the Directive, and by analysing the ruling. The article advances that (i) the conclusion that organisms obtained by means of techniques/methods of mutagenesis constitute GMOs under the Directive means that the resulting organisms must comply with the GMO definition, ie the genetic material of the resulting organisms has been altered in a way that does not occur naturally by mating and/or natural recombination; (ii) the conclusion that organisms obtained by means of techniques/methods of directed mutagenesis were not intended to be excluded from the scope of the Directive is not inconsistent with the negotiation history of the Directive; (iii) whether an organism falls under the description of “obtained by means of techniques/methods of directed mutagenesis” depends on whether the genetic material of the resulting organisms has been altered in a way that does not occur naturally by mating and/or natural recombination. Finally, the article offers an analysis of the EU GMO definition, concluding that for an organism to be a GMO in the sense of the Directive, the technique used, as well as the genetic alterations of the resulting organism, must be considered. |
doi_str_mv | 10.1017/err.2020.105 |
format | Article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_swepu</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_swepub_primary_oai_slubar_slu_se_112260</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><cupid>10_1017_err_2020_105</cupid><sourcerecordid>2778866155</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c379t-8bc9d0aa6d286aa9b700603c00a16febc621abec0bbc2fcd6221e460f9d4aaaa3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNptUEFLwzAYDaLgmLv5AwJe7UyyNm2OMucUhju4gbeQpF_XjrWpSevw35sycRff5fF9vPd4PIRuKZlSQtMHcG7KCBuu5AKNGBUkylgsLtGIZjyNmBAf12ji_Z4ExIJkGRmh9aYE_N6prve4b3JweLHFK3XEtsBrt1NN5WuPn-ALDraFHHels_2uxG82fPASGltXBm_AlE312YO_QVeFOniY_PIYbZ8Xm_lLtFovX-ePq8jMUtFFmTYiJ0rxnGVcKaFTQjiZGUIU5QVowxlVGgzR2rDC5JwxCjEnhchjFTAbo-kp1x-h7bVsXVUr9y2tqqQ_9Fq5gaQHSSljIXqM7k6G1tmhaCf3tndN6ChZmmYZ5zRJgur-pDLOeu-g-AumRA4zyzCzHGYOV3JuYVStXZXv4Jz6r-EHvvWAVA</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Open Access Repository</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2778866155</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>The Status under EU Law of Organisms Developed through Novel Genomic Techniques</title><source>HeinOnline Law Journal Library</source><source>SWEPUB Freely available online</source><source>Cambridge University Press Journals Complete</source><creator>VAN DER MEER, Piet ; ANGENON, Geert ; BERGMANS, Hans ; BUHK, Hans Jörg ; CALLEBAUT, Sam ; CHAMON, Merijn ; ERIKSSON, Dennis ; GHEYSEN, Godelieve ; HARWOOD, Wendy ; HUNDLEBY, Penny ; KEARNS, Peter ; MCLOUGHLIN, Thomas ; ZIMNY, Tomasz</creator><creatorcontrib>VAN DER MEER, Piet ; ANGENON, Geert ; BERGMANS, Hans ; BUHK, Hans Jörg ; CALLEBAUT, Sam ; CHAMON, Merijn ; ERIKSSON, Dennis ; GHEYSEN, Godelieve ; HARWOOD, Wendy ; HUNDLEBY, Penny ; KEARNS, Peter ; MCLOUGHLIN, Thomas ; ZIMNY, Tomasz ; Sveriges lantbruksuniversitet</creatorcontrib><description>In a ruling on 25 July 2018, the Court of Justice of the European Union concluded that organisms obtained by means of techniques/methods of mutagenesis constitute GMOs in the sense of Directive 2001/18, and that organisms obtained by means of techniques/methods of directed mutagenesis are not excluded from the scope of the Directive. Following the ruling, there has been much debate about the possible wider implications of the ruling. In October 2019, the Council of the European Union requested the European Commission to submit, in light of the CJEU ruling, a study regarding the status of novel genomic techniques under Union Law. For the purpose of the study, the Commission initiated stakeholder consultations early in 2020. Those consultations focused on the technical status of novel genomic techniques. This article aims to contribute to the discussion on the legal status of organisms developed through novel genomic techniques, by offering some historical background to the negotiations on the European Union (EU) GMO Directives as well as a technical context to some of the terms in the Directive, and by analysing the ruling. The article advances that (i) the conclusion that organisms obtained by means of techniques/methods of mutagenesis constitute GMOs under the Directive means that the resulting organisms must comply with the GMO definition, ie the genetic material of the resulting organisms has been altered in a way that does not occur naturally by mating and/or natural recombination; (ii) the conclusion that organisms obtained by means of techniques/methods of directed mutagenesis were not intended to be excluded from the scope of the Directive is not inconsistent with the negotiation history of the Directive; (iii) whether an organism falls under the description of “obtained by means of techniques/methods of directed mutagenesis” depends on whether the genetic material of the resulting organisms has been altered in a way that does not occur naturally by mating and/or natural recombination. Finally, the article offers an analysis of the EU GMO definition, concluding that for an organism to be a GMO in the sense of the Directive, the technique used, as well as the genetic alterations of the resulting organism, must be considered.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1867-299X</identifier><identifier>ISSN: 2190-8249</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 2190-8249</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1017/err.2020.105</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press</publisher><subject>Councils ; Courts ; European law ; Genetic engineering ; Genetically modified organisms ; Genomics ; Juridik (exklusive juridik och samhälle) ; Law (excluding Law and Society) ; Legal status ; Mating ; Mutagenesis ; Negotiation ; Negotiations ; Plant Biotechnology ; Radiation ; Växtbioteknologi</subject><ispartof>European journal of risk regulation, 2023-03, Vol.14 (1), p.93-112</ispartof><rights>The Author(s), 2021. Published by Cambridge University Press</rights><rights>The Author(s), 2021. Published by Cambridge University Press. This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution License http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (the “License”). Notwithstanding the ProQuest Terms and Conditions, you may use this content in accordance with the terms of the License.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c379t-8bc9d0aa6d286aa9b700603c00a16febc621abec0bbc2fcd6221e460f9d4aaaa3</citedby><orcidid>0000-0003-3231-6635</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.cambridge.org/core/product/identifier/S1867299X20001051/type/journal_article$$EHTML$$P50$$Gcambridge$$Hfree_for_read</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>164,230,314,551,777,781,882,27906,27907,55610</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://res.slu.se/id/publ/112260$$DView record from Swedish Publication Index$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>VAN DER MEER, Piet</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>ANGENON, Geert</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>BERGMANS, Hans</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>BUHK, Hans Jörg</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>CALLEBAUT, Sam</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>CHAMON, Merijn</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>ERIKSSON, Dennis</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>GHEYSEN, Godelieve</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>HARWOOD, Wendy</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>HUNDLEBY, Penny</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>KEARNS, Peter</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>MCLOUGHLIN, Thomas</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>ZIMNY, Tomasz</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Sveriges lantbruksuniversitet</creatorcontrib><title>The Status under EU Law of Organisms Developed through Novel Genomic Techniques</title><title>European journal of risk regulation</title><addtitle>Eur. j. risk regul</addtitle><description>In a ruling on 25 July 2018, the Court of Justice of the European Union concluded that organisms obtained by means of techniques/methods of mutagenesis constitute GMOs in the sense of Directive 2001/18, and that organisms obtained by means of techniques/methods of directed mutagenesis are not excluded from the scope of the Directive. Following the ruling, there has been much debate about the possible wider implications of the ruling. In October 2019, the Council of the European Union requested the European Commission to submit, in light of the CJEU ruling, a study regarding the status of novel genomic techniques under Union Law. For the purpose of the study, the Commission initiated stakeholder consultations early in 2020. Those consultations focused on the technical status of novel genomic techniques. This article aims to contribute to the discussion on the legal status of organisms developed through novel genomic techniques, by offering some historical background to the negotiations on the European Union (EU) GMO Directives as well as a technical context to some of the terms in the Directive, and by analysing the ruling. The article advances that (i) the conclusion that organisms obtained by means of techniques/methods of mutagenesis constitute GMOs under the Directive means that the resulting organisms must comply with the GMO definition, ie the genetic material of the resulting organisms has been altered in a way that does not occur naturally by mating and/or natural recombination; (ii) the conclusion that organisms obtained by means of techniques/methods of directed mutagenesis were not intended to be excluded from the scope of the Directive is not inconsistent with the negotiation history of the Directive; (iii) whether an organism falls under the description of “obtained by means of techniques/methods of directed mutagenesis” depends on whether the genetic material of the resulting organisms has been altered in a way that does not occur naturally by mating and/or natural recombination. Finally, the article offers an analysis of the EU GMO definition, concluding that for an organism to be a GMO in the sense of the Directive, the technique used, as well as the genetic alterations of the resulting organism, must be considered.</description><subject>Councils</subject><subject>Courts</subject><subject>European law</subject><subject>Genetic engineering</subject><subject>Genetically modified organisms</subject><subject>Genomics</subject><subject>Juridik (exklusive juridik och samhälle)</subject><subject>Law (excluding Law and Society)</subject><subject>Legal status</subject><subject>Mating</subject><subject>Mutagenesis</subject><subject>Negotiation</subject><subject>Negotiations</subject><subject>Plant Biotechnology</subject><subject>Radiation</subject><subject>Växtbioteknologi</subject><issn>1867-299X</issn><issn>2190-8249</issn><issn>2190-8249</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2023</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>IKXGN</sourceid><sourceid>8G5</sourceid><sourceid>ABUWG</sourceid><sourceid>AFKRA</sourceid><sourceid>AZQEC</sourceid><sourceid>BENPR</sourceid><sourceid>CCPQU</sourceid><sourceid>DWQXO</sourceid><sourceid>GNUQQ</sourceid><sourceid>GUQSH</sourceid><sourceid>M2O</sourceid><sourceid>D8T</sourceid><recordid>eNptUEFLwzAYDaLgmLv5AwJe7UyyNm2OMucUhju4gbeQpF_XjrWpSevw35sycRff5fF9vPd4PIRuKZlSQtMHcG7KCBuu5AKNGBUkylgsLtGIZjyNmBAf12ji_Z4ExIJkGRmh9aYE_N6prve4b3JweLHFK3XEtsBrt1NN5WuPn-ALDraFHHels_2uxG82fPASGltXBm_AlE312YO_QVeFOniY_PIYbZ8Xm_lLtFovX-ePq8jMUtFFmTYiJ0rxnGVcKaFTQjiZGUIU5QVowxlVGgzR2rDC5JwxCjEnhchjFTAbo-kp1x-h7bVsXVUr9y2tqqQ_9Fq5gaQHSSljIXqM7k6G1tmhaCf3tndN6ChZmmYZ5zRJgur-pDLOeu-g-AumRA4zyzCzHGYOV3JuYVStXZXv4Jz6r-EHvvWAVA</recordid><startdate>20230301</startdate><enddate>20230301</enddate><creator>VAN DER MEER, Piet</creator><creator>ANGENON, Geert</creator><creator>BERGMANS, Hans</creator><creator>BUHK, Hans Jörg</creator><creator>CALLEBAUT, Sam</creator><creator>CHAMON, Merijn</creator><creator>ERIKSSON, Dennis</creator><creator>GHEYSEN, Godelieve</creator><creator>HARWOOD, Wendy</creator><creator>HUNDLEBY, Penny</creator><creator>KEARNS, Peter</creator><creator>MCLOUGHLIN, Thomas</creator><creator>ZIMNY, Tomasz</creator><general>Cambridge University Press</general><scope>IKXGN</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>3V.</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>8BJ</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>8G5</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>BFMQW</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>FQK</scope><scope>GNUQQ</scope><scope>GUQSH</scope><scope>JBE</scope><scope>M2O</scope><scope>MBDVC</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>PRINS</scope><scope>Q9U</scope><scope>ADTPV</scope><scope>AOWAS</scope><scope>D8T</scope><scope>ZZAVC</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3231-6635</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>20230301</creationdate><title>The Status under EU Law of Organisms Developed through Novel Genomic Techniques</title><author>VAN DER MEER, Piet ; ANGENON, Geert ; BERGMANS, Hans ; BUHK, Hans Jörg ; CALLEBAUT, Sam ; CHAMON, Merijn ; ERIKSSON, Dennis ; GHEYSEN, Godelieve ; HARWOOD, Wendy ; HUNDLEBY, Penny ; KEARNS, Peter ; MCLOUGHLIN, Thomas ; ZIMNY, Tomasz</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c379t-8bc9d0aa6d286aa9b700603c00a16febc621abec0bbc2fcd6221e460f9d4aaaa3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2023</creationdate><topic>Councils</topic><topic>Courts</topic><topic>European law</topic><topic>Genetic engineering</topic><topic>Genetically modified organisms</topic><topic>Genomics</topic><topic>Juridik (exklusive juridik och samhälle)</topic><topic>Law (excluding Law and Society)</topic><topic>Legal status</topic><topic>Mating</topic><topic>Mutagenesis</topic><topic>Negotiation</topic><topic>Negotiations</topic><topic>Plant Biotechnology</topic><topic>Radiation</topic><topic>Växtbioteknologi</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>VAN DER MEER, Piet</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>ANGENON, Geert</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>BERGMANS, Hans</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>BUHK, Hans Jörg</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>CALLEBAUT, Sam</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>CHAMON, Merijn</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>ERIKSSON, Dennis</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>GHEYSEN, Godelieve</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>HARWOOD, Wendy</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>HUNDLEBY, Penny</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>KEARNS, Peter</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>MCLOUGHLIN, Thomas</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>ZIMNY, Tomasz</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Sveriges lantbruksuniversitet</creatorcontrib><collection>Cambridge Journals Open Access</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences (IBSS)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Research Library (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central UK/Ireland</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>Continental Europe Database</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Korea</collection><collection>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Student</collection><collection>Research Library Prep</collection><collection>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences</collection><collection>Research Library</collection><collection>Research Library (Corporate)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>ProQuest Central China</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Basic</collection><collection>SwePub</collection><collection>SwePub Articles</collection><collection>SWEPUB Freely available online</collection><collection>SwePub Articles full text</collection><jtitle>European journal of risk regulation</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>VAN DER MEER, Piet</au><au>ANGENON, Geert</au><au>BERGMANS, Hans</au><au>BUHK, Hans Jörg</au><au>CALLEBAUT, Sam</au><au>CHAMON, Merijn</au><au>ERIKSSON, Dennis</au><au>GHEYSEN, Godelieve</au><au>HARWOOD, Wendy</au><au>HUNDLEBY, Penny</au><au>KEARNS, Peter</au><au>MCLOUGHLIN, Thomas</au><au>ZIMNY, Tomasz</au><aucorp>Sveriges lantbruksuniversitet</aucorp><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>The Status under EU Law of Organisms Developed through Novel Genomic Techniques</atitle><jtitle>European journal of risk regulation</jtitle><addtitle>Eur. j. risk regul</addtitle><date>2023-03-01</date><risdate>2023</risdate><volume>14</volume><issue>1</issue><spage>93</spage><epage>112</epage><pages>93-112</pages><issn>1867-299X</issn><issn>2190-8249</issn><eissn>2190-8249</eissn><abstract>In a ruling on 25 July 2018, the Court of Justice of the European Union concluded that organisms obtained by means of techniques/methods of mutagenesis constitute GMOs in the sense of Directive 2001/18, and that organisms obtained by means of techniques/methods of directed mutagenesis are not excluded from the scope of the Directive. Following the ruling, there has been much debate about the possible wider implications of the ruling. In October 2019, the Council of the European Union requested the European Commission to submit, in light of the CJEU ruling, a study regarding the status of novel genomic techniques under Union Law. For the purpose of the study, the Commission initiated stakeholder consultations early in 2020. Those consultations focused on the technical status of novel genomic techniques. This article aims to contribute to the discussion on the legal status of organisms developed through novel genomic techniques, by offering some historical background to the negotiations on the European Union (EU) GMO Directives as well as a technical context to some of the terms in the Directive, and by analysing the ruling. The article advances that (i) the conclusion that organisms obtained by means of techniques/methods of mutagenesis constitute GMOs under the Directive means that the resulting organisms must comply with the GMO definition, ie the genetic material of the resulting organisms has been altered in a way that does not occur naturally by mating and/or natural recombination; (ii) the conclusion that organisms obtained by means of techniques/methods of directed mutagenesis were not intended to be excluded from the scope of the Directive is not inconsistent with the negotiation history of the Directive; (iii) whether an organism falls under the description of “obtained by means of techniques/methods of directed mutagenesis” depends on whether the genetic material of the resulting organisms has been altered in a way that does not occur naturally by mating and/or natural recombination. Finally, the article offers an analysis of the EU GMO definition, concluding that for an organism to be a GMO in the sense of the Directive, the technique used, as well as the genetic alterations of the resulting organism, must be considered.</abstract><cop>Cambridge, UK</cop><pub>Cambridge University Press</pub><doi>10.1017/err.2020.105</doi><tpages>20</tpages><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3231-6635</orcidid><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 1867-299X |
ispartof | European journal of risk regulation, 2023-03, Vol.14 (1), p.93-112 |
issn | 1867-299X 2190-8249 2190-8249 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_swepub_primary_oai_slubar_slu_se_112260 |
source | HeinOnline Law Journal Library; SWEPUB Freely available online; Cambridge University Press Journals Complete |
subjects | Councils Courts European law Genetic engineering Genetically modified organisms Genomics Juridik (exklusive juridik och samhälle) Law (excluding Law and Society) Legal status Mating Mutagenesis Negotiation Negotiations Plant Biotechnology Radiation Växtbioteknologi |
title | The Status under EU Law of Organisms Developed through Novel Genomic Techniques |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-17T10%3A49%3A38IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_swepu&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=The%20Status%20under%20EU%20Law%20of%20Organisms%20Developed%20through%20Novel%20Genomic%20Techniques&rft.jtitle=European%20journal%20of%20risk%20regulation&rft.au=VAN%20DER%20MEER,%20Piet&rft.aucorp=Sveriges%20lantbruksuniversitet&rft.date=2023-03-01&rft.volume=14&rft.issue=1&rft.spage=93&rft.epage=112&rft.pages=93-112&rft.issn=1867-299X&rft.eissn=2190-8249&rft_id=info:doi/10.1017/err.2020.105&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_swepu%3E2778866155%3C/proquest_swepu%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2778866155&rft_id=info:pmid/&rft_cupid=10_1017_err_2020_105&rfr_iscdi=true |