Risk governance of transgenic plants: bridging science, policy, and public trust.

Transgenic plants and genome editing technologies are revolutionizing agriculture through sustainable approaches to food security, pest management, and adaptation to climate change; but their widespread use is hampered by regulatory systems that are fragmented, ethics considerations, and an ongoing lack of trust from the general public. In contrast to other literature that evaluates regulation processes and public acceptance separately, our review paper introduces a new, holistic approach that includes both technical risk assessment from a scientific perspective, and Codex Alimentarius and OECD standards, and the socio-legal and judicial environment of how the national policy decisions are actually made. The paper provides a comparative, historical analysis of the key difference between product- and process-based risk governance in the USA, the EU, and India. Through the use of case studies with global significance like MON810 maize, Bt Brinjal, and the April 2024 Philippine Court of Appeals' order for cease-and-desist of Golden Rice, we discuss the increasing tension between administrative scientific approvals and precautionary judicial orders. We further explore the emerging exemptions to regulation of Site-Directed Nuclease (SDN-1 and SDN-2) genome edited crops which led to India's revolutionary 2025 commercialization of climate-resilient rice crops. Our review ends with a forward-looking approach to biotechnology regulation policy, making an appeal to shift from static historical dichotomies towards flexible risk-proportionate and internationally coordinated regulatory systems. Finally, we show that global success of agricultural biotechnology is not just about safety verification, but rather about establishment of transparent and communicable institutions that can transform scientific risk assessments into legitimate risk management decisions.