A framework for a European network for a systematic environmental impact assessment of genetically modified organisms (GMO)

The assessment of the impacts of growing genetically modified (GM) crops remains a major political and scientific challenge in Europe. Concerns have been raised by the evidence of adverse and unexpected environmental effects and differing opinions on the outcomes of environmental risk assessments (ERA). The current regulatory system is hampered by insufficiently developed methods for GM crop safety testing and introduction studies. Improvement to the regulatory system needs to address the lack of well designed GM crop monitoring frameworks, professional and financial conflicts of interest within the ERA research and testing community, weaknesses in consideration of stakeholder interests and specific regional conditions, and the lack of comprehensive assessments that address the environmental and socio economic risk assessment interface. To address these challenges, we propose a European Network for systematic GMO impact assessment (ENSyGMO) with the aim directly to enhance ERA and post-market environmental monitoring (PMEM) of GM crops, to harmonize and ultimately secure the long-term socio-political impact of the ERA process and the PMEM in the EU. These goals would be achieved with a multi-dimensional and multi-sector approach to GM crop impact assessment, targeting the variability and complexity of the EU agro-environment and the relationship with relevant socio-economic factors. Specifically, we propose to develop and apply methodologies for both indicator and field site selection for GM crop ERA and PMEM, embedded in an EU-wide typology of agro-environments. These methodologies should be applied in a pan-European field testing network using GM crops. The design of the field experiments and the sampling methodology at these field sites should follow specific hypotheses on GM crop effects and use state-of-the art sampling, statistics and modelling approaches. To address public concerns and create confidence in the ENSyGMO results, actors with relevant specialist knowledge from various sectors should be involved.

[1]  A. Székács,et al.  Inter-laboratory comparison of Cry1Ab toxin quantification in MON 810 maize by enzyme-immunoassay , 2012 .

[2]  J. Faber,et al.  Elaborations on the use of the ecosystem services concept for application in ecological risk assessment for soils. , 2012, The Science of the total environment.

[3]  G. Mace,et al.  Biodiversity and ecosystem services: a multilayered relationship. , 2012, Trends in ecology & evolution.

[4]  J. Lezaun Bees, Beekeepers, and Bureaucrats: Parasitism and the Politics of Transgenic Life , 2011 .

[5]  Berien Elbersen,et al.  Spatial allocation of farming systems and farming indicators in Europe , 2011 .

[6]  C. A. Mücher,et al.  European environmental stratifications and typologies: an overview , 2011 .

[7]  C. Manaia,et al.  Association of financial or professional conflict of interest to research outcomes on health risks or nutritional assessment studies of genetically modified products , 2011 .

[8]  J. Römbke,et al.  Environmental risk assessment of genetically modified plants - concepts and controversies , 2011 .

[9]  R. Mesnage,et al.  Genetically modified crops safety assessments: present limits and possible improvements , 2011 .

[10]  Winfried Schröder,et al.  Cultivation of GMO in Germany: support of monitoring and coexistence issues by WebGIS technology , 2011 .

[11]  Joanna Goven,et al.  From risk assessment to in-context trajectory evaluation - GMOs and their social implications , 2011 .

[12]  O. Lemaire,et al.  “Interactive Technology Assessment” and Beyond: the Field Trial of Genetically Modified Grapevines at INRA-Colmar , 2010, PLoS biology.

[13]  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.

[14]  D. Glover Is Bt Cotton a Pro-Poor Technology? A Review and Critique of the Empirical Record , 2010 .

[15]  Mark Rounsevell,et al.  Developing qualitative scenario storylines for environmental change assessment , 2010 .

[16]  M. Otto,et al.  A synthesis of laboratory and field studies on the effects of transgenic Bacillus thuringiensis (Bt) maize on non‐target Lepidoptera , 2010 .

[17]  Richard Verhoeven,et al.  Information system for monitoring environmental impacts of genetically modified organisms , 2010, Environmental science and pollution research international.

[18]  J. Römbke,et al.  General recommendations for soil ecotoxicological tests suitable for the environmental risk assessment of genetically modified plants , 2010, Integrated environmental assessment and management.

[19]  A. Myhr A Precautionary Approach to Genetically Modified Organisms: Challenges and Implications for Policy and Science , 2010 .

[20]  Eszter Takács,et al.  Detection of Cry1Ab toxin in the leaves of MON 810 transgenic maize , 2010, Analytical and bioanalytical chemistry.

[21]  T. Traavik,et al.  Demographic responses of Daphnia magna fed transgenic Bt-maize , 2009, Ecotoxicology.

[22]  F. Graef,et al.  Scale Implications for Environmental Risk Assessment and Monitoring of the Cultivation of Genetically Modified Herbicide-Resistant Sugar Beet: A Review , 2010 .

[23]  T. J. Jong General surveillance of genetically modified plants in the EC and the need for controls , 2010, Journal für Verbraucherschutz und Lebensmittelsicherheit.

[24]  D. Andow,et al.  Problem Formulation and Option Assessment (PFOA) Linking Governance and Environmental Risk Assessment for Technologies: A Methodology for Problem Analysis of Nanotechnologies and Genetically Engineered Organisms , 2009, Journal of Law, Medicine & Ethics.

[25]  Eric Tollens,et al.  On the proportionality of EU spatial ex ante coexistence regulations: Reply , 2009 .

[26]  Beatriz Rodríguez-Labajos,et al.  Catalan agriculture and genetically modified organisms (GMOs) -- An application of DPSIR model , 2009 .

[27]  W. Sutherland,et al.  Reaping the Benefits: Science and the sustainable intensification of global agriculture , 2009 .

[28]  David B Lindenmayer,et al.  Adaptive monitoring: a new paradigm for long-term research and monitoring. , 2009, Trends in ecology & evolution.

[29]  J. Settele,et al.  Insect Conservation , 2009, Science.

[30]  M. Smale,et al.  Measuring the Economic Impacts of Transgenic Crops in Developing Agriculture during the First Decade: Approaches, Findings, and Future Directions , 2009 .

[31]  F. Graef,et al.  GMO monitoring data coordination and harmonisation at EU level – Outcomes of the European Commission Working Group on Guidance Notes supplementing Annex VII of Directive 2001/18/EC , 2009, Journal für Verbraucherschutz und Lebensmittelsicherheit.

[32]  Ulrike Felt,et al.  Taking European Knowledge Society Seriously , 2009 .

[33]  Saso Dzeroski,et al.  Sustainable introduction of GM crops into european agriculture: a summary report of the FP6 SIGMEA research project * , 2009 .

[34]  N. Bénachour,et al.  Glyphosate formulations induce apoptosis and necrosis in human umbilical, embryonic, and placental cells. , 2009, Chemical research in toxicology.

[35]  Francois-Christophe Coleno,et al.  Simulation and evaluation of GM and non-GM segregation management strategies among European grain merchants , 2008 .

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

[37]  R. Altenburger,et al.  An ecological perspective in aquatic ecotoxicology: Approaches and challenges , 2008 .

[38]  D. Schmeller,et al.  Cultivation of genetically modified organisms: resource needs for monitoring adverse effects on biodiversity , 2008, Biodiversity and Conservation.

[39]  R. Binimelis,et al.  Coexistence of Plants and Coexistence of Farmers: Is an Individual Choice Possible? , 2008 .

[40]  D. O. Hessen,et al.  Reduced Fitness of Daphnia magna Fed a Bt-Transgenic Maize Variety , 2008, Archives of environmental contamination and toxicology.

[41]  L. Firbank,et al.  Identifying and managing the conflicts between agriculture and biodiversity conservation in Europe - a review , 2008 .

[42]  A. Hilbeck,et al.  Identifying indicator species for post-release monitoring of genetically modified, herbicide resistant crops , 2008, Euphytica.

[43]  J. Römbke,et al.  Analysis and validation of present ecotoxicological test methods and strategies for the risk assessment of genetically modified plants , 2008 .

[44]  D. Schmeller,et al.  EU-wide monitoring methods and systems of surveillance for species and habitats of Community interest Instrument: SSP Thematic Priority: Biodiversity conservation D16: Framework for integration of different species monitoring schemes , 2008 .

[45]  F. Wendler,et al.  European Agencies and Input Legitimacy: EFSA, EMeA and EPO in the Post‐Delegation Phase , 2007 .

[46]  E. J. Rosi-Marshall,et al.  Toxins in transgenic crop byproducts may affect headwater stream ecosystems , 2007, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[47]  Cornelia Ohl,et al.  Towards an understanding of long-term ecosystem dynamics by merging socio-economic and environmental research: Criteria for long-term socio-ecological research sites selection , 2007 .

[48]  Berien Elbersen,et al.  Farm management indicators and farm typologies as a basis for assessments in a changing policy environment. , 2007, Journal of environmental management.

[49]  Arie Rip,et al.  TAKING EUROPEAN KNOWLEDGE SOCIETY SERIOUSLY Report of the Expert Group on Science and Governance to the Science, Economy and Society Directorate, Directorate-General for Research, European Commission , 2007 .

[50]  M. Finck,et al.  Concepts for General Surveillance: VDI Proposals Standardisation and Harmonisation in the Field of GMO-Monitoring , 2006, Journal für Verbraucherschutz und Lebensmittelsicherheit.

[51]  R. Relyea THE IMPACT OF INSECTICIDES AND HERBICIDES ON THE BIODIVERSITY AND PRODUCTIVITY OF AQUATIC COMMUNITIES , 2006 .

[52]  Klaus Henle,et al.  Biological Indicator Systems in Floodplains – a Review , 2006 .

[53]  R. Wheatley,et al.  Methodology to support non-target and biodiversity risk assessment , 2006 .

[54]  A. Werner,et al.  Methodological scheme for designing the monitoring of genetically modified crops at the regional scale , 2005, Environmental monitoring and assessment.

[55]  M. Castaldini,et al.  Impact of Bt Corn on Rhizospheric and Soil Eubacterial Communities and on Beneficial Mycorrhizal Symbiosis in Experimental Microcosms , 2005, Applied and Environmental Microbiology.

[56]  A. Turrini,et al.  The Impact of Genetically Modified Crops on Soil Microbial Communities , 2006 .

[57]  Caspar A. Mücher,et al.  A climatic stratification of the environment of Europe , 2005 .

[58]  S. Arpaia,et al.  The impact of transgenic plants on natural enemies: a critical review of laboratory studies , 2005 .

[59]  A. Turrini,et al.  The antifungal Dm-AMP1 protein from Dahlia merckii expressed in Solanum melongena is released in root exudates and differentially affects pathogenic fungi and mycorrhizal symbiosis. , 2004, The New phytologist.

[60]  D. Andow,et al.  Science-Based Risk Assessment for Nontarget Effects of Transgenic Crops , 2004 .

[61]  M. Schermer,et al.  GMO and sustainable development in less favoured regions—the need for alternative paths of development , 2004 .

[62]  M. Hill,et al.  Weeds in fields with contrasting conventional and genetically modified herbicide-tolerant crops. II. Effects on individual species. , 2003, Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences.

[63]  M. Hill,et al.  Weeds in fields with contrasting conventional and genetically modified herbicide-tolerant crops. I. Effects on abundance and diversity. , 2003, Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences.

[64]  J. Porter,et al.  Agroecology, scaling and interdisciplinarity , 2003 .

[65]  G. Yeates,et al.  Nematodes as soil indicators: functional and biodiversity aspects , 2003, Biology and Fertility of Soils.

[66]  Mike J. May,et al.  An introduction to the Farm‐Scale Evaluations of genetically modified herbicide‐tolerant crops , 2003 .

[67]  Alfred Stein,et al.  An overview of spatial sampling procedures and experimental design of spatial studies for ecosystem comparisons , 2003 .

[68]  Marion Desquilbet,et al.  Who Pays the Costs of Non‐Gmo Segregation and Identity Preservation? , 2008 .

[69]  B. Wynne,et al.  Creating Public Alienation: Expert Cultures of Risk and Ethics on GMOs , 2001, Science as culture.

[70]  K. Nielsen,et al.  Transformation of Acinetobacter sp. Strain BD413(pFG4ΔnptII) with Transgenic Plant DNA in Soil Microcosms and Effects of Kanamycin on Selection of Transformants , 2000, Applied and Environmental Microbiology.

[71]  D. Saxena,et al.  Transgenic plants: Insecticidal toxin in root exudates from Bt corn , 1999, Nature.

[72]  Φ. Παππάς,et al.  Genetically modified , 1999, Nature.

[73]  K. Smalla,et al.  Transformation of Acinetobacter sp. Strain BD413 by Transgenic Sugar Beet DNA , 1998, Applied and Environmental Microbiology.

[74]  Francis E. Clark,et al.  Soil Organisms as Components of Ecosystems , 1978 .