1
|
Purnhagen K, Ambrogio Y, Bartsch D, Eriksson D, Jorasch P, Kahrmann J, Kardung M, Molitorisová A, Monaco A, Nanda AK, Romeis J, Rostoks N, Unkel K, Schneider XT. Options for regulating new genomic techniques for plants in the European Union. NATURE PLANTS 2023; 9:1958-1961. [PMID: 38052952 DOI: 10.1038/s41477-023-01570-2] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/15/2023] [Accepted: 10/24/2023] [Indexed: 12/07/2023]
Abstract
Which option for regulating plants derived from new genomic techniques in European Union law is feasible and justifiable scientifically? The European Commission has proposed a new regulation on plants obtained by specific new genomic techniques, which is now subject to discussion in the legislative process. From the perspective of the European Commission's envisaged legal reforms of European Union law towards the integration of greater sustainability, we conclude that the option focusing on plant traits delivering sustainability benefits should be chosen, which is most fitting to facilitate a contribution to climate action, the transition towards climate neutrality, and promptly integrate sustainability into all food-related policies. To assist the decision-making in the legislative process, we outline six regulatory options resulting from regulatory research involving interdisciplinary teams.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | | | - Detlef Bartsch
- Federal Office of Consumer Protection and Food Safety, Berlin, Germany
| | - Dennis Eriksson
- Department of Plant Breeding, Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences, Alnarp, Sweden
| | | | - Jens Kahrmann
- Federal Office of Consumer Protection and Food Safety, Berlin, Germany
| | - Maximilian Kardung
- Agricultural Economics and Rural Policy Group, Wageningen University, Wageningen, The Netherlands
| | | | | | - Amrit K Nanda
- Plants for the Future European Technology Platform, Brussels, Belgium
| | - Jörg Romeis
- Agroecology and Environment, Agroscope, Zurich, Switzerland
| | - Nils Rostoks
- Faculty of Biology, University of Latvia, Riga, Latvia
| | - Katharina Unkel
- Federal Office of Consumer Protection and Food Safety, Berlin, Germany
| | | |
Collapse
|
2
|
Escajedo San-Epifanio L, Filibi I, Lasa López A, Puigdomènech P, Uncetabarrenechea Larrabe J. Possible EU futures for CRISPR-edited plants: Little margin for optimism? FRONTIERS IN PLANT SCIENCE 2023; 14:1141455. [PMID: 37008488 PMCID: PMC10061071 DOI: 10.3389/fpls.2023.1141455] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/10/2023] [Accepted: 02/22/2023] [Indexed: 06/19/2023]
Abstract
This article addresses the scenarios that may be encountered by the first application for pre-market approval of a CRISPR-edited plant in the EU. Two alternative scenarios are considered in the short and medium term. One of these possible EU futures depends on the final drafting and approval of EU legislation on certain New Genomic Techniques, which was started in 2021 and is due to be quite advanced before the next European Parliament elections in 2024. Since the proposed legislation excludes plants with foreign DNA, two different approval processes for CRISPR-edited plants will coexist if the legislation enters into force: one for plants whose genome has been altered, resulting in mutagenesis, cisgenesis and intragenesis; and the second for plants whose alterations result in transgenesis in general. In the event that this legislative process does not succeed, CRISPR-edited plants in the EU could face a regulatory scenario whose foundations were laid in the 1990s: the regulatory framework that applies to GM crops, food and feed. In this review, an ad hoc analytical framework has been built that considers in depth the two possible futures for CRISPR-edited plants in the EU. This framework emphasises the way in which the European Union and the Member States (MS), with their respective national interests, have historically shaped the regulatory framework for plant breeding in the EU. On the basis of the analyses carried out on the two possible futures for CRISPR-edited plants and of their potential with respect to plant breeding, the main conclusions are the following. Firstly, that the regulatory review that started in 2021 is not in itself "good enough" for plant breeding and CRISPR-edited plants. Secondly, that compared to its alternative, the regulatory review currently underway contains at least some promising improvements in the short term. Hence, thirdly, in addition to adopting the current regulation, the MS need to continue to work towards a substantial improvement in the legal status of plant breeding in the EU in the medium term.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Leire Escajedo San-Epifanio
- Department of Public Law, Historical-Legal Sciences and History of Political Thought, University of the Basque Country, Bilbao, Spain
| | - Igor Filibi
- Department of Public Law, Historical-Legal Sciences and History of Political Thought, University of the Basque Country, Bilbao, Spain
| | - Ainhoa Lasa López
- Department of Public Law, Historical-Legal Sciences and History of Political Thought, University of the Basque Country, Bilbao, Spain
| | - Pere Puigdomènech
- Centre for Research in Agricultural Genomics - CRAG, Spanish National Research Center (CSIC) - Institut of Agro-food Research and Technology (IRTA) - Autonomous University of Barcelona (UAB) - University of Barcelona (UB), Barcelona, Spain
| | - Javier Uncetabarrenechea Larrabe
- Department of Public Law, Historical-Legal Sciences and History of Political Thought, University of the Basque Country, Bilbao, Spain
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
The socio-economic factors affecting the emergence and impacts of new genomic techniques in agriculture: A scoping review. Trends Food Sci Technol 2022. [DOI: 10.1016/j.tifs.2022.07.013] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/18/2022]
|
4
|
Sundh I, Del Giudice T, Cembalo L. Reaping the Benefits of Microorganisms in Cropping Systems: Is the Regulatory Policy Adequate? Microorganisms 2021; 9:microorganisms9071437. [PMID: 34361873 PMCID: PMC8303151 DOI: 10.3390/microorganisms9071437] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/25/2021] [Revised: 06/23/2021] [Accepted: 06/30/2021] [Indexed: 11/21/2022] Open
Abstract
Within food plant cropping systems, microorganisms provide vital functions and ecosystem services, such as biological pest and disease control, promotion of plant growth and crop quality, and biodegradation of organic matter and pollutants. The beneficial effects of microorganisms can be achieved and/or enhanced by agricultural management measures that target the resident microbial biodiversity or by augmentation with domesticated and propagated microbial strains. This study presents a critical review of the current legislation and regulatory policies pertaining to the utilization of plant-beneficial microorganisms in the European Union (EU). For augmentative approaches, the nature of the intended effect and the product claim determine how a microbiological product is categorized and regulated, and pre-market authorization may be mandatory. Typically, microbial products have been incorporated into frameworks that were designed for evaluating non-living substances, and are therefore not well suited to the specific properties of live microorganisms. We suggest that regulatory harmonization across the sector could stimulate technical development and facilitate implementation of crop management methods employing microorganisms. Possible scenarios for regulatory reform in the longer term are discussed, but more investigation into their feasibility is needed. The findings of this study should serve as a catalyst for more efficient future use of plant-beneficial microorganisms, to the benefit of agriculture as well as the environment.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Ingvar Sundh
- Department of Molecular Sciences, Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences, P.O. Box 7015, 750 07 Uppsala, Sweden
- Correspondence:
| | - Teresa Del Giudice
- Department of Agricultural Sciences, University of Naples Federico II, 80055 Portici, Italy; (T.D.G.); (L.C.)
| | - Luigi Cembalo
- Department of Agricultural Sciences, University of Naples Federico II, 80055 Portici, Italy; (T.D.G.); (L.C.)
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Sundh I, Eilenberg J. Why has the authorization of microbial biological control agents been slower in the EU than in comparable jurisdictions? PEST MANAGEMENT SCIENCE 2021; 77:2170-2178. [PMID: 33201551 PMCID: PMC8048978 DOI: 10.1002/ps.6177] [Citation(s) in RCA: 8] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/29/2020] [Revised: 11/06/2020] [Accepted: 11/17/2020] [Indexed: 06/11/2023]
Abstract
The aim of this study was to identify reasons why the authorization of microbial pest control agents is lengthier under regulatory frameworks of the European Union (EU) than in comparable jurisdictions. A main conclusion is that although the EU's regulatory processes have strong scientific foundations, the most appropriate scientific concepts, knowledge and expertise have not been applied in the safety assessment of microorganisms and biological control. Tradition and conceptual legacies from assessments of conventional chemical pesticides have likely contributed to this by steering the evaluations of microorganisms in less appropriate directions. According to our investigation, the current framework for microbial plant protection products complies poorly with the principles that legislation should have legal predictability, proportionality, and that it should be non-discriminative, for instance in comparison to corresponding regulations in comparable jurisdictions. We also found that existing possibilities to take non-safety and ethical considerations into account can probably be used more. To rationalize the EU's authorization of microbial control products, both the basic legislation and the evaluations of agents and products need stronger rooting in fundamental microbiological science. © 2020 The Authors. Pest Management Science published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of Society of Chemical Industry.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Ingvar Sundh
- Department of Molecular SciencesSwedish University of Agricultural SciencesUppsalaSweden
| | - Jørgen Eilenberg
- Department of Plant and Environmental SciencesUniversity of CopenhagenFrederiksberg CDenmark
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
New Plant Breeding Technologies: An Assessment of the Political Economy of the Regulatory Environment and Implications for Sustainability. SUSTAINABILITY 2021. [DOI: 10.3390/su13073687] [Citation(s) in RCA: 9] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/27/2022]
Abstract
This perspective discusses the impact of political economy on the regulation of modern biotechnology. Modern biotechnology has contributed to sustainable development, but its potential has been underexplored and underutilized. We highlight the importance of the impacts of regulations for investments in modern biotechnology and argue that improvements are possible via international harmonization of approval processes. This development is urgently needed for improving sustainable development. Policy makers in the European Union (EU) in particular are challenged to rethink their approach to regulating modern biotechnology as their decisions have far ranging consequences beyond the boundaries of the EU and they have the power to influence international policies.
Collapse
|
7
|
A Cross-Country Measurement of the EU Bioeconomy: An Input–Output Approach. SUSTAINABILITY 2021. [DOI: 10.3390/su13063033] [Citation(s) in RCA: 8] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/23/2022]
Abstract
This paper measures the development of the national income share of the bioeconomy for 28 European Union Member States (MS) and 16 industries of BioMonitor scope from 2005 to 2015. The paper proposes a model which includes the up- and downstream linkages using Input-Output tables. The results show that for the majority of the MS the value added of the up- and downstream sector is at the band of 40%–50% of the total bioeconomy value added and has on average increased since the financial crisis.
Collapse
|
8
|
Abstract
The EU’s 2018 Bioeconomy Strategy Update and the European Green Deal recently confirmed that the bioeconomy is high on the political agenda in Europe. Here, we propose a conceptual analysis framework for quantifying and analyzing the development of the EU bioeconomy. The bioeconomy has several related concepts (e.g., bio-based economy, green economy, and circular economy) and there are clear synergies between these concepts, especially between the bioeconomy and circular economy concepts. Analyzing the driving factors provides important information for monitoring activities. We first derive the scope of the bioeconomy framework in terms of bioeconomy sectors and products to be involved, the needed geographical coverage and resolution, and time period. Furthermore, we outline a set of indicators linked to the objectives of the EU’s bioeconomy strategy. In our framework, measuring developments will, in particular, focus on the bio-based sectors within the bioeconomy as biomass and food production is already monitored. The selected indicators commit to the EU Bioeconomy Strategy objectives and conform with findings from previous studies and stakeholder consultation. Additionally, several new indicators have been suggested and they are related to measuring the impact of changes in supply, demand drivers, resource availability, and policies on sustainability goals.
Collapse
|
9
|
Jorasch P. Potential, Challenges, and Threats for the Application of New Breeding Techniques by the Private Plant Breeding Sector in the EU. FRONTIERS IN PLANT SCIENCE 2020; 11:582011. [PMID: 33101349 PMCID: PMC7545909 DOI: 10.3389/fpls.2020.582011] [Citation(s) in RCA: 14] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/10/2020] [Accepted: 09/04/2020] [Indexed: 05/25/2023]
Abstract
Reconciling sustainability with agricultural productivity in the face of climate change relies strongly on the development of resilient, high-yielding crops of superior nutritional value that can be grown more resource efficiently. Therefore, innovation in plant breeding has gained unprecedented importance. Plant breeding depends upon genetic variability within crops and their relatives as a basis for developing new plant varieties with improved characteristics. Plant breeders are continuously integrating the latest methods in plant biology and genetics into their breeding toolbox to more efficiently use existing diversity but also to induce new genetic variation. Over the past years, ever more precise and efficient plant breeding methods have been developed. This plant breeding innovation leap is based on an in-depth understanding of plant genomes and refinement of breeding methods, enabling more efficient, more precise and faster progress in achieving the desired breeding goals. Consequently, these plant breeding innovations are rapidly being developed and utilized internationally and across the seed sector, public and private research, plant species and markets. The results of a survey among 62 private plant breeding companies conducted by Euroseeds and presented in this publication confirm the enormous interest of companies in using new breeding techniques (NBTs) for a wide range of crop species and traits and the negative impact of the current regulatory situation in the EU on companies' decisions for investments in NBT-related R&D activities for the EU market and beyond.
Collapse
|
10
|
Eriksson D, Custers R, Edvardsson Björnberg K, Hansson SO, Purnhagen K, Qaim M, Romeis J, Schiemann J, Schleissing S, Tosun J, Visser RG. Options to Reform the European Union Legislation on GMOs: Scope and Definitions. Trends Biotechnol 2020; 38:231-234. [DOI: 10.1016/j.tibtech.2019.12.002] [Citation(s) in RCA: 30] [Impact Index Per Article: 7.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/29/2019] [Revised: 12/03/2019] [Accepted: 12/04/2019] [Indexed: 12/14/2022]
|
11
|
Wesseler J, Politiek H, Zilberman D. The Economics of Regulating New Plant Breeding Technologies - Implications for the Bioeconomy Illustrated by a Survey Among Dutch Plant Breeders. FRONTIERS IN PLANT SCIENCE 2019; 10:1597. [PMID: 31921246 PMCID: PMC6932994 DOI: 10.3389/fpls.2019.01597] [Citation(s) in RCA: 6] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/09/2019] [Accepted: 11/13/2019] [Indexed: 05/26/2023]
Abstract
New plant breeding technologies (NPBTs) are increasingly used for developing new plants with novel traits. The science tells us that those plants in general are as safe as than those once developed using "conventional" plant breeding methods. The knowledge about the induced changes and properties of the new plants by using NPBTs is more precise. This should lead to the conclusion that plants developed using NPBTs should not be regulated differently than those developed using "conventional" plant breeding methods. This contribution discusses the economics of regulating new plant breeding technologies. We first develop the theoretical model and elaborate on the different regulatory approaches being used and compare their advantages and disadvantages. Then we provide a perspectives on EU regulation around mutagenesis-based New Plant Breeding Techniques (NPBT), formed by new insights from a survey among Dutch plant breeding companies. The survey measures the attitude of breeding companies towards the ruling of the EU Court of Justice that subjected the use of CRISPR-Cas in the development of new plant varieties under the general EU regulations around GMOs. The results show that plant breeders experience a financial barrier because of the ruling, with perceived negative impact on competitiveness and investments in CRISPR-Cas as a result. The degree of negative impact differs however significantly among seed-sectors and company sizes. One of the most striking results was the relative optimism of companies in the sector about more lenient legislation in the next five years, despite the stated negative effects.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Justus Wesseler
- Agricultural Economics and Rural Policy Group, Wageningen University & Research, Wageningen, Netherlands
| | - Hidde Politiek
- Agricultural Economics and Rural Policy Group, Wageningen University & Research, Wageningen, Netherlands
| | - David Zilberman
- Department of Agricultural and Resource Economics, University of California, Berkeley, Berkeley, CA, United States
| |
Collapse
|
12
|
Jin Y, Drabik D, Heerink N, Wesseler J. Getting an Imported GM Crop Approved in China. Trends Biotechnol 2019; 37:566-569. [PMID: 30929862 DOI: 10.1016/j.tibtech.2019.02.004] [Citation(s) in RCA: 15] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/18/2018] [Revised: 02/12/2019] [Accepted: 02/13/2019] [Indexed: 01/18/2023]
Abstract
What are the procedures and trends for obtaining approval for imported genetically modified (GM) crops in China, and how do approval dates and length of approval in China compare with those in other countries? The answers are crucial for current food security in China and the future of crops derived by gene editing.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Yan Jin
- Agricultural Economics and Rural Policy Group, Wageningen University, Wageningen, The Netherlands
| | - Dušan Drabik
- Agricultural Economics and Rural Policy Group, Wageningen University, Wageningen, The Netherlands
| | - Nico Heerink
- Development Economics Group, Wageningen University, Wageningen, The Netherlands
| | - Justus Wesseler
- Agricultural Economics and Rural Policy Group, Wageningen University, Wageningen, The Netherlands.
| |
Collapse
|