The introduction of genetically modified (GM) crops and foods into Europe has generated considerable controversy. Despite a risk assessment system that is intended to be precautionary in nature, the decisions that have been taken have not gathered public confidence. Key attributes of a precautionary appraisal system include humility, completeness, assessing benefits and justifications, making comparisons, allowing for public participation, transparency, diversity, and the ``mapping'' of alternative views rather than the prescription of single solutions. A comparison of the European GM regulatory system with a different (more precautionary) approach using a ``multi-criteria mapping'' technique reveals a number of problems. These include the narrow framing of the established risk assessment system (thereby excluding many issues of public concern), a lack of public involvement in the process, and a failure to include appropriate comparisons or a diversity of options. Recent changes to the European regulatory system only go part of the way to addressing these issues. Further controversy may therefore be expected. However, practical ways of undertaking a more broad-based precautionary approach are now available (including the multi-criteria mapping method). These new approaches to technology assessment offer a means for decision making to earn greater public confidence in this complex and difficult area.