Peaceful Coexistence Among Growers Of Genetically Engineered, Conventional and Organic Crops.

Peaceful Coexistence Among Growers Of: Genetically Engineered, Conventional and Organic Crops (pdf)
March 1-2, 2006 Boulder, Colorado

Introduction

In March 2006, the Pew Initiative on Food and Biotechnology and the National Association of State Departments of Agriculture (NASDA) held a workshop that examined how growers of conventional, genetically engineered (GE), and organic crops can “peacefully coexist” in our ever-evolving marketplace.

The workshop, which took place in Boulder, CO, was the second of three sponsored by the Pew Initiative and NASDA. Participants included representatives from state and federal governments; GE, conventional, and organic farmers; the European Union, seed companies, food processing and marketing companies, academia and the biotech industry. All gathered to identify potential options for advancing peaceful coexistence in the marketplace and to understand the existing and future roles of the public and private sectors in achieving this goal.

PREFACE FROM CONFERENCE REPORT
It is a basic principle in the U.S. that farmers should be able to produce commodities by any method they prefer and to market them in any market available, assuming they meet all safety and marketing standards.
In recent years, market access problems have arisen such that growers of conventional and organic crops have at times not been able to meet the specifications required by their markets, due to unintended commingling with genetically engineered (GE) plant material. While the problems to date have involved financial losses to conventional and organic growers, many expect that the growers of GE crops with high-value output traits will soon face similar challenges in meeting stringent market specifications.

The need to segregate crops by production method is a relatively new development in agriculture. Strict, though varying, rules regarding GE crops in international markets are a key driver of the issue. The lack of standardized, internationally accepted marketing standards, testing methodologies, and protocols pose a significant challenge to the smooth and efficient operation of both domestic and international agricultural marketing chains. At the same time, they provide a marketing opportunity for producers and marketers who can successfully navigate the maze of standards and regulations.
Oftentimes policymakers, particularly state agriculture officials, are challenged to “pick sides” among GE, conventional, and organic production methods. In reality, however, all of these production methods provide key market opportunities for U.S. farmers and are critical to the long-term viability of our rural communities. In fact, the rapid adoption rates in the U.S. of both organic and GE production methods over the past decade could suggest that some synergy does exist. Some of the growth in demand for organic foods is certainly driven by consumers who seek to avoid products derived from GE crops. In turn, U.S. growers of GE crops have been able to operate free of mandatory labeling (which has significantly suppressed GE crop adoption rates in other countries) at least in part because of the existence of a robust domestic organic market. So at the macro level, coexistence between organic, conventional, and GE crops is taking place.
At ground level, however, farmers continue to periodically have loads of grain rejected because they do not meet market specifications. The question is, how can growers of conventional, organic, and GE crops coexist peacefully in today’s marketplace? How can we ensure as few problems as possible for all producers, so they can all effectively and efficiently market their crops?...


Workshop Agenda

Welcome and Introduction

* Adrian Polansky, Secretary of Agriculture, Kansas and NASDA Biotech Task Force Chair
* Orlo (Bob) Ehart, National Association of State Departments of Agriculture
* Dr. Michael Fernandez, Pew Initiative on Food and Biotechnology

The Gerber Experience

State of Markets Today, Developing Trends in the Market and Ways to Advance Peaceful Coexistence

* Joe Dickson, Whole Foods Market
* Dr. Wolf-Martin Maier, European Union
* Michael Zumwinkle, Cargill, Incorporated
* Mike Gumina, Pioneer Hi-Bred

Growers' Perspectives

Current Liability Debates in the US and the EU: Where Is It All Going, and Is It Helping or Hindering the Path to Peaceful Coexistence?

The North Dakota State University Peaceful Coexistence Project: Lessons Learned and Ideas For Advancing the Goal

What is "Peaceful Coexistence" from States' Perspectives and What States Can (and Should) Do To Advance the Goal of Peaceful Coexistence?—Food for Thought

What Does 'Peaceful Coexistence' Mean? If Not Achieved, What are the Implications, Particularly at the State Level?

If Peaceful Coexistence is an Important Goal to Foster, What Are Potential Tools for Encouraging "Peaceful Coexistence?"

What Roles Can/Should States Play in Advancing Peaceful Coexistence?