Environmental change challenges decision-making during post-market environmental monitoring of transgenic crops

The ability to decide what kind of environmental changes observed during post-market environmental monitoring of genetically modified (GM) crops represent environmental harm is an essential part of most legal frameworks regulating the commercial release of GM crops into the environment. Among others, such decisions are necessary to initiate remedial measures or to sustain claims of redress linked to environmental liability. Given that consensus on criteria to evaluate ‘environmental harm’ has not yet been found, there are a number of challenges for risk managers when interpreting GM crop monitoring data for environmental decision-making. In the present paper, we argue that the challenges in decision-making have four main causes. The first three causes relate to scientific data collection and analysis, which have methodological limits. The forth cause concerns scientific data evaluation, which is controversial among the different stakeholders involved in the debate on potential impacts of GM crops on the environment. This results in controversy how the effects of GM crops should be valued and what constitutes environmental harm. This controversy may influence decision-making about triggering corrective actions by regulators. We analyse all four challenges and propose potential strategies for addressing them. We conclude that environmental monitoring has its limits in reducing uncertainties remaining from the environmental risk assessment prior to market approval. We argue that remaining uncertainties related to adverse environmental effects of GM crops would probably be assessed in a more efficient and rigorous way during pre-market risk assessment. Risk managers should acknowledge the limits of environmental monitoring programmes as a tool for decision-making.

[1]  Alan Raybould,et al.  Problem formulation and hypothesis testing for environmental risk assessments of genetically modified crops. , 2006, Environmental biosafety research.

[2]  J. Schiemann,et al.  Does the baseline concept provide appropriate tools for decision making? , 2006, Journal für Verbraucherschutz und Lebensmittelsicherheit.

[3]  Division on Earth,et al.  The Impact of Genetically Engineered Crops on Farm Sustainability in the United States , 2010 .

[4]  L. Firbank,et al.  Genetically Modified Crops and Farmland Biodiversity , 2000, Science.

[5]  P. Calow Ecotoxicology: What are we trying to protect? , 1994 .

[6]  P. Vos,et al.  A Framework for the Design of Ecological Monitoring Programs as a Tool for Environmental and Nature Management , 2000 .

[7]  Allan T Woodburn,et al.  Glyphosate: production, pricing and use worldwide , 2000 .

[8]  David A. Bohan,et al.  Invertebrate responses to the management of genetically modified herbicide-tolerant and conventional spring crops. I. Soil-surface-active invertebrates. , 2003, Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences.

[9]  Cathy Hawes,et al.  Effects on weed and invertebrate abundance and diversity of herbicide management in genetically modified herbicide-tolerant winter-sown oilseed rape , 2005, Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences.

[10]  D. Shaner,et al.  Imidazolinone-tolerant crops: history, current status and future. , 2005, Pest management science.

[11]  F. Herzog,et al.  Case-specific monitoring of butterflies to determine potential effects of transgenic Bt-maize in Switzerland , 2009 .

[12]  D. Reheul,et al.  Ethics in the Societal Debate on Genetically Modified Organisms: A (Re)Quest for Sense and Sensibility , 2006 .

[13]  G. Jaffe Regulating Transgenic Crops: A Comparative Analysis of Different Regulatory Processes , 2004, Transgenic Research.

[14]  David A. Bohan,et al.  Derivation and interpretation of hazard quotients to assess ecological risks from the cultivation of insect-resistant transgenic crops. , 2011, Journal of agricultural and food chemistry.

[15]  Stephen O Duke,et al.  The current status and environmental impacts of glyphosate-resistant crops: a review. , 2006, Journal of environmental quality.

[16]  Jacques Baudry,et al.  A holistic landscape ecological study of the interactions between farming activities and ecological patterns in Brittany, France. , 2000 .

[17]  Marko Bohanec,et al.  A qualitative multi-attribute model for economic and ecological assessment of genetically modified crops , 2008 .

[18]  R. P. Freckleton,et al.  Deciding the Future of GM Crops in Europe , 2003, Science.

[19]  Glenn W. Suter,et al.  The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's Generic Ecological Assessment Endpoints , 2004 .

[20]  C. Spillane,et al.  GM directive deficiencies in the European Union , 2008, EMBO reports.

[21]  R. Bunce,et al.  Changes in the abundance of farmland birds in relation to the timing of agricultural intensification in England and Wales , 2000 .

[22]  Olivier Sanvido,et al.  Ecological impacts of genetically modified crops: ten years of field research and commercial cultivation. , 2007, Advances in biochemical engineering/biotechnology.

[23]  C. A. Mücher,et al.  Remote Sensing in Landscape Ecology: Experiences and Perspectives in a European Context , 2005, Landscape Ecology.

[24]  S. Powles,et al.  Evolved glyphosate-resistant weeds around the world: lessons to be learnt. , 2008, Pest management science.

[25]  Proposed Definition of Environmental Damage Illustrated by the Cases of Genetically Modified Crops and Invasive Species , 2009, Conservation biology : the journal of the Society for Conservation Biology.

[26]  G W Suter Generic assessment endpoints are needed for ecological risk assessment. , 2000, Risk analysis : an official publication of the Society for Risk Analysis.

[27]  J. Schiemann,et al.  Concepts for General Surveillance of Genetically Modified (GM) Plants: The EFSA position , 2006, Journal für Verbraucherschutz und Lebensmittelsicherheit.

[28]  Michael B. Usher,et al.  Scientific requirements of a monitoring programme , 1991 .

[29]  Aiming Qi,et al.  A novel approach to the use of genetically modified herbicide tolerant crops for environmental benefit , 2003, Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series B: Biological Sciences.

[30]  S. Morris EU biotech crop regulations and environmental risk: a case of the emperor's new clothes? , 2007, Trends in biotechnology.

[31]  F. Bigler,et al.  An approach for post‐market monitoring of potential environmental effects of Bt‐maize expressing Cry1Ab on natural enemies , 2009 .

[32]  Teja Tscharntke,et al.  SCALE‐DEPENDENT EFFECTS OF LANDSCAPE CONTEXT ON THREE POLLINATOR GUILDS , 2002 .

[33]  W. Sutherland,et al.  Post‐war changes in arable farming and biodiversity in Great Britain , 2002 .

[34]  F. Bigler,et al.  A conceptual framework for the design of environmental post-market monitoring of genetically modified plants. , 2005, Environmental biosafety research.

[35]  J. Schiemann,et al.  Farm questionnaires for monitoring genetically modified crops: a case study using GM maize. , 2008, Environmental biosafety research.

[36]  S. Aviron,et al.  Monitoring effects of GM crops on butterflies: the use of multiscale approaches for general surveillance , 2006, Journal für Verbraucherschutz und Lebensmittelsicherheit.

[37]  E. Waltz GM crops: Battlefield , 2009, Nature.

[38]  R. Phipps,et al.  Environmental benefits of genetically modified crops: Global and European perspectives on their ability to reduce pesticide use , 2002 .

[39]  Barrie Goldsmith,et al.  Monitoring for Conservation and Ecology , 1990 .

[40]  Mike J. May,et al.  Management of genetically modified herbicide–tolerant sugar beet for spring and autumn environmental benefit , 2005, Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences.

[41]  J. M. Holland,et al.  The environmental consequences of adopting conservation tillage in Europe: reviewing the evidence , 2004 .

[42]  M. A. Melo,et al.  Post-market monitoring: legal framework in Brazil and first results , 2010 .

[43]  J. Schiemann,et al.  A mathematical model of exposure of non-target Lepidoptera to Bt-maize pollen expressing Cry1Ab within Europe , 2010, Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences.

[44]  Henryk Luka,et al.  Ecological cross compliance promotes farmland biodiversity in Switzerland , 2009 .

[45]  Hilko van der Voet,et al.  Statistical aspects of environmental risk assessment of GM plants for effects on non-target organisms. , 2009, Environmental biosafety research.

[46]  S. Polasky,et al.  Agricultural sustainability and intensive production practices , 2002, Nature.

[47]  J. Schiemann,et al.  The usefulness of a mathematical model of exposure for environmental risk assessment , 2011, Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences.

[48]  Hails,et al.  Genetically modified plants - the debate continues. , 2000, Trends in ecology & evolution.

[49]  Carsten Thies,et al.  REVIEWS AND SYNTHESES Landscape perspectives on agricultural intensification and biodiversity - ecosystem service management , 2005 .

[50]  A. Shelton,et al.  UK field-scale evaluations answer wrong questions , 2003, Nature Biotechnology.

[51]  Andrew Balmford,et al.  Farming and the Fate of Wild Nature , 2005, Science.

[52]  Sujatha Sankula,et al.  Comparative Environmental Impacts of Biotechnology-derived and Traditional Soybean , 2002 .

[53]  Adrian Bowman,et al.  Assessing ecological responses to environmental change using statistical models , 2007 .

[54]  A. Raybould Ecological versus ecotoxicological methods for assessing the environmental risks of transgenic crops , 2007 .

[55]  Anthony M. Shelton,et al.  Recommendations for the design of laboratory studies on non-target arthropods for risk assessment of genetically engineered plants , 2010, Transgenic Research.

[56]  L. K. Ward,et al.  The role of weeds in supporting biological diversity within crop fields , 2003 .

[57]  Laurence Guichard,et al.  Comparison of methods to assess the sustainability of agricultural systems. A review , 2011, Agronomy for Sustainable Development.

[58]  Jörg Romeis,et al.  Transgenic crops expressing Bacillus thuringiensis toxins and biological control , 2006, Nature Biotechnology.

[59]  Steven E. Naranjo,et al.  Bt Crop Effects on Functional Guilds of Non-Target Arthropods: A Meta-Analysis , 2008, PloS one.

[60]  David A. Bohan,et al.  Invertebrate responses to the management of genetically modified herbicide-tolerant and conventional spring crops. II. Within-field epigeal and aerial arthropods. , 2003, Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences.

[61]  A. Shelton,et al.  Assessment of risk of insect-resistant transgenic crops to nontarget arthropods , 2008, Nature Biotechnology.

[62]  R. Green,et al.  Agricultural intensification and the collapse of Europe's farmland bird populations , 2001, Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series B: Biological Sciences.

[63]  A. M. Hersperger,et al.  Driving forces of landscape change — current and new directions , 2004, Landscape Ecology.