Technological developments may require a policy response when the potential effects of such technology contribute to unwanted or unpredictable changes. The introduction of genetic modification triggered policy makers to design a framework for risk assessment and release procedures that may be linked to conventional variety release systems (Traynor & Komen, this volume). Often, technological change reaches the policy level only when problems appear after introduction. In some cases, however, discussions can start even before the technology is ready for the market. A good example of the latter is the Genetic Use Restriction Technology (GURT), which triggered a very intense debate because of its possible use in the production of 'sterile seeds.' This application was dubbed 'terminator technology' in the popular press. GURT is thus an interesting case to analyse the link between technology and policy development. This paper heavily draws upon a study that was prepared by FAO (Visser et al., 2001). This case illustrates that a wide range of concerns and options are linked with one technological development, and that arguments arise from different policy fields. Analysis thus needs a thorough understanding of the individual opportunities and concerns as well as the linked arguments. GURT has received an extremely bad name in the international public debate. Very few, however, have seriously thought about possible policy responses and the tools that are available to the policy makers to implement their decisions. This paper intends to clarify both the complexity of such technological developments and it gives some suggestions about dealing with different concerns in the GURT's case.