Genetically Modified Crops and the Environment

is also the opportunity to grow crops with industrial, neutraceutical (functional foods), and pharmaceutical Genetic modification (GM) of crops provides new crop manage(medical compounds) applications. Environmental benment options (production traits) and crops with industrial, pharmaceutical, and neutraceutical applications are likely to follow. The environefits and risks of GM plants have been debated at length mental benefits and risks of growing GM crops have drawn (Brill, 1985; Colwell et al., 1985; Boulter, 1993; Harconsiderable, often polarized debate. This review seeks a balanced lander, 1990; Hileman, 1995; Lewis and Palevitz, 1999; appraisal of environmental issues, and looks at principles associated Miflin, 1999; Nottingham, 1998; Porter, 1999; Raybould with several GM production traits. Environmental assessment needs et al., 1999). Nevertheless, adoption of GM crops by to consider the nature of the introduced trait, in the context of the the farming community has been rapid. More than 24 biology of the plant and the environment it will be grown in (e.g., million ha of genetically modified (GM) crops were prospects of gene flow into other species). Interactions with the target grown in the 1998 season (James, 1998) and about 40 ecosystem, including the possibility of cummulative impacts from ormillion ha in the 1999 season (ERS, 1999). Continuing ganisms already released into the ecosystem (e.g., prospects for gene environmental concerns challenge further implementapyramiding) need to also be included in assessments. Current agricultural management practices and ecosystems have their own impacts tion of the technology in a debate that has become on the environment, and it is against this background that the benefits polarized and politicized (Glickman, 1999; Serageldin, and risks of releasing GM organisms should be judged. Before release, 1999). It is argued that GM crops place the environment data collection on impacts of GMOs is temporally and spatially conand human health at risk (Greenpeace, 1999; Natural strained, so caution must be exercised in decision making. Potential Law Party, 1999) and that life sciences companies reimpacts also need to be monitored after release and the post-release sponsible for their introduction threaten global food monitoring framework needs scope to identify unforeseen impacts. security (Rural Advancement Foundation Int., 1999). The environmental sustainability of using GMOs will depend largely The effects of GM corn pollen on larval development on wise management practices and monitoring must provide approof the monarch butterfly (Losey et al., 1999) and the priate data to support continuing adaptation of management and premature release of feeding trial data during GM prodregulation of GMOs. uct development have generated negative public opinion often associated with press coverage of technological controversy (Gaskell et al., 1999; Royal Society, 1999). T use of molecular biological techniques to manipSuspicion of the intentions of corporate players (Vidal, ulate DNA and thus alter the make-up of organisms 1999) has been exacerbated by the provision of inaccuhas provided alternative strategies for on-farm managerate information to regulators (Coghlan, 1999; Woolf, ment of weeds, pests, and disease (James, 1998). There 1999) and proposals to control seed viability (Oliver et al., 1998). It is in this atmosphere of confrontation and J.E. Barton, Centre for Legumes in Mediterranean Agriculture, Univ. distrust that the impact of GM plants on the environof Western Australia, Nedlands, WA 6907; and M. Dracup, Agriculment is discussed. While there is a need to scientifically ture Western Australia, Locked Bag 4, Bentley WA 6983 Australia. asses the environmental benefits resulting from the inReceived 31 Jan. 2000. *Corresponding author (mdracup@agric.