Edits, mutations and GM | Rothamsted Research

As a plant geneticist in Europe, I must carefully pick my way through some of the most onerous
constraints to scientific and technological developments ever devised by politicians and policymakers, writes Nigel Halford.

However, I’m now encouraged by what seems to be a landmark opinion for the European Court of Justice, provided earlier this month, that could pave the way for new techniques in crop biotechnology to be used with more freedom. [This view was subsequently endorsed in parliament's House of Lords in March.] Let me explain.

The European Union has the world’s most restrictive and cumbersome regulations on genetically modified (GM) crops. As a result, only two GM crops have ever been licensed for cultivation in Europe, and one of those, the Amflora potato, was subsequently withdrawn because the company that produced and marketed it, BASF, like many others, decided to walk away from crop biotech in Europe.

So, a single variety of insect-resistant maize, MON810, is the only GM crop available to European farmers, and even MON810 is not available everywhere because some Member States impose their own national bans. And this is despite millions of tonnes of GM soybean and maize grown elsewhere in the world being imported into Europe every year, mainly for animal feed.

Europe’s regulations on GM crops were drawn up in the 1990s and early 2000s, culminating in directive GM Food and Feed Regulation (EC) No. 1829/2003. This directive was adopted in 2004, and brought the regulation of GM crop use in Europe under the control of the European Commission.

GM crops can be cultivated or used for food or feed in Europe only with the Commission’s permission, after a detailed and lengthy assessment of health and environmental safety data; and food derived from GM crops must be clearly labelled...

More @ Edits, mutations and GM | Rothamsted Research: