Biosafety Regulation: a comparative analysis of the South African and Ugandan experience

Simple item page
dc.contributor.authorJoy, Faidaen_ZA
dc.date.accessioned2014-07-30T18:01:52Z
dc.date.available2014-07-30T18:01:52Z
dc.date.issued2014-07-30
dc.description.abstractThis study provides a critical and comparative analysis of biosafety regulation in South Africa and Uganda. The overall objective of the study is to establish which country prescribes a more adequate regulatory regime. Biosafety regulation under international and regional law is the first key aspect that this paper examines. This is done in order to set out a context under which domestic biosafety regulation is examined. This study argues that international law generally sets minimum standards while regional law sets higher standards for biosafety regulation. The second key area examined is biosafety regulation in South Africa. The paper sets out an overview of the relevant biosafety laws in South Africa and conducts a critical analysis of these laws pointing out their strengths and weaknesses. The study is premised on the argument that South African regulatory regime is inadequate for purposes of regulating biosafety. The third part of this paper focuses on Uganda's regulatory regime. A similar analysis was carried where the study found that the Ugandan regime is reasonably adequate for purposes of protection of the environment and human health. The final key aspect of this paper is a comparative analysis of biosafety regulation in South Africa and Uganda. This is done thematically, setting out differences and similarities. This part examines the extent to which South Africa and Uganda have attempted to comply with their international obligations. This paper concludes that, although the Ugandan regulatory regime (both existing and proposed) has some weaknesses, it is a more adequate regime than the South African one. Further, Uganda is more compliant with the biosafety Protocol and the African Model Law than South Africa.en_ZA
dc.identifier.apacitationJoy, F. (2014). <i>Biosafety Regulation: a comparative analysis of the South African and Ugandan experience</i>. (Thesis). University of Cape Town ,Faculty of Law ,Institute of Marine and Environmental Law. Retrieved from http://hdl.handle.net/11427/4478en_ZA
dc.identifier.chicagocitationJoy, Faida. <i>"Biosafety Regulation: a comparative analysis of the South African and Ugandan experience."</i> Thesis., University of Cape Town ,Faculty of Law ,Institute of Marine and Environmental Law, 2014. http://hdl.handle.net/11427/4478en_ZA
dc.identifier.citationJoy, F. 2014-07-30. Biosafety Regulation: a comparative analysis of the South African and Ugandan experience. University of Cape Town.en_ZA
dc.identifier.ris TY - Thesis / Dissertation AU - Joy, Faida AB - This study provides a critical and comparative analysis of biosafety regulation in South Africa and Uganda. The overall objective of the study is to establish which country prescribes a more adequate regulatory regime. Biosafety regulation under international and regional law is the first key aspect that this paper examines. This is done in order to set out a context under which domestic biosafety regulation is examined. This study argues that international law generally sets minimum standards while regional law sets higher standards for biosafety regulation. The second key area examined is biosafety regulation in South Africa. The paper sets out an overview of the relevant biosafety laws in South Africa and conducts a critical analysis of these laws pointing out their strengths and weaknesses. The study is premised on the argument that South African regulatory regime is inadequate for purposes of regulating biosafety. The third part of this paper focuses on Uganda's regulatory regime. A similar analysis was carried where the study found that the Ugandan regime is reasonably adequate for purposes of protection of the environment and human health. The final key aspect of this paper is a comparative analysis of biosafety regulation in South Africa and Uganda. This is done thematically, setting out differences and similarities. This part examines the extent to which South Africa and Uganda have attempted to comply with their international obligations. This paper concludes that, although the Ugandan regulatory regime (both existing and proposed) has some weaknesses, it is a more adequate regime than the South African one. Further, Uganda is more compliant with the biosafety Protocol and the African Model Law than South Africa. DA - 2014-07-30 DB - OpenUCT DP - University of Cape Town LK - https://open.uct.ac.za PB - University of Cape Town PY - 2014 T1 - Biosafety Regulation: a comparative analysis of the South African and Ugandan experience TI - Biosafety Regulation: a comparative analysis of the South African and Ugandan experience UR - http://hdl.handle.net/11427/4478 ER - en_ZA
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/11427/4478
dc.identifier.vancouvercitationJoy F. Biosafety Regulation: a comparative analysis of the South African and Ugandan experience. [Thesis]. University of Cape Town ,Faculty of Law ,Institute of Marine and Environmental Law, 2014 [cited yyyy month dd]. Available from: http://hdl.handle.net/11427/4478en_ZA
dc.language.isoenen_ZA
dc.publisher.departmentInstitute of Marine and Environmental Lawen_ZA
dc.publisher.facultyFaculty of Lawen_ZA
dc.publisher.institutionUniversity of Cape Town
dc.titleBiosafety Regulation: a comparative analysis of the South African and Ugandan experienceen_ZA
dc.typeMaster Thesis
dc.type.qualificationlevelMasters
dc.type.qualificationnameLLMen_ZA
uct.type.filetypeText
uct.type.filetypeImage
uct.type.publicationResearchen_ZA
uct.type.resourceThesisen_ZA
Files
Original bundle
Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
Thumbnail Image
Name:
thesis_law_fdxjoy001.pdf
Size:
387.32 KB
Format:
Adobe Portable Document Format
Description:
Download
Collections
Masters