Risk as Infrastructure: Animal Biotechnology, Governmentality, and the (Bio)politics of Risk-based Regulation

Previously relegated to laboratory and research spaces, genetically modified (GM) animals – those in which genes have been transferred from other species – are slowly entering public spaces as national governments approve entry into commercial markets for agricultural, pharmaceutical, and entertainment purposes. In 2016, the Canadian federal government approved the first GM food animal commercialised in Canada, known by its tradename AquAdvantage® salmon (AAS). This approval was met with significant public resistance, and, in 2024, the company that produced AAS shuttered its operations. Drawing on empirical examples from Canadian regulatory approvals of AAS and using the concept of infrastructure as a complement to governmentality analysis, this paper examines how a narrow understanding and implementation of risk assessment came to define and dominate animal biotechnology regulation in a Canadian context. Risk assessment has well-documented shortcomings including constraints on public engagement, lack of institutional reflexivity about guiding values and assumptions, and constraints on regulatory agency discretion. The problems associated with risk assessment warrant acknowledgement even if risk infrastructures are difficult to transform and replace.