The release of genetically modified crops into the environment. Part I. Overview of current status and regulations.

In the past 6 years, the global area of commercially grown, genetically modified (GM) crops has increased more than 30-fold to over 52 million hectares. The number of countries involved has more than doubled. Especially in developing countries, the GM crop area is anticipated to increase rapidly in the coming years. Despite this high adoption rate and future promises, there is a multitude of concerns about the impact of GM crops on the environment. Regulatory approaches in Europe and North America are essentially different. In the EU, it is based on the process of making GM crops; in the US, on the characteristics of the GM product. Many other countries are in the process of establishing regulation based on either system or a mixture. Despite these differences, the information required for risk assessment tends to be similar. Each risk assessment considers the possibility, probability and consequence of harm on a case-by-case basis. For GM crops, the impact of non-use should be added to this evaluation. It is important that the regulation of risk should not turn into the risk of regulation. The best and most appropriate baseline for comparison when performing risk assessment on GM crops is the impact of plants developed by traditional breeding. The latter is an integral and accepted part of agriculture.

[1]  Claire Marris,et al.  Public Perceptions of Agricultural Biotechnologies in Europe: Report of the PABE project funded by the European Commission, DG Research (contract number: FAIR CT98-3844 (DG12 - SSMI) , 2001 .

[2]  K. Dawkins Gene Wars: The Politics of Biotechnology , 1997 .

[3]  Jan-Peter Nap,et al.  The release of genetically modified crops into the environment. Part II. Overview of ecological risk assessment. , 2003, The Plant journal : for cell and molecular biology.

[4]  Patricial L. Traynor,et al.  Analysis of a national biosafety system: regulatory policies and procedures in Egypt. , 2000 .

[5]  Jens O. Riis,et al.  Looking into the Future , 1998, Games in Operations Management.

[6]  Scott Rozelle,et al.  Plant Biotechnology in China , 2002, Science.

[7]  Keith Redenbaugh,et al.  Safety Assessment of Genetically Engineered Fruits and Vegetables: A Case Study of the Flavr Savr Tomato , 1992 .

[8]  J. Falck-Zepeda,et al.  Cotton GMO Adoption and Private Profitability , 2001 .

[9]  FROM THE COMMISSION on the precautionary principle , 2022 .

[10]  Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety to the Convention on Biological Diversity , 2000, International Legal Materials.

[11]  S. Gisvold Looking into the future , 1994 .

[12]  Division on Earth,et al.  Environmental Effects of Transgenic Plants: The Scope and Adequacy of Regulation , 2002 .

[13]  J. I. Cohen,et al.  Managing Agricultural Biotechnology: Addressing Research Program Needs and Policy Implications , 1999 .

[14]  L. Simonsen Field testing genetically modified organisms: framework for decisions. National Research Council executive summary. , 1990, Recombinant DNA technical bulletin.

[15]  J. Allan,et al.  Report of the Royal Commission on Genetic Modification. , 2001 .

[16]  H. Kuiper,et al.  Assessment of the food safety issues related to genetically modified foods. , 2001, The Plant journal : for cell and molecular biology.

[17]  D. Letourneau Genetically Modified Pest-Protected Plants: Science and Regulation , 2001 .

[18]  Julie Babinard,et al.  The Domestic and Regional Regulatory Environment , 2001 .

[19]  C. Juma,et al.  Biosafety : the safe application of biotechnology in agriculture and the environment , 1992 .

[20]  Division on Earth Field Testing Genetically Modified Organisms: Framework for Decisions , 1989 .

[21]  Gerald C. Nelson Genetically Modified Organisms in Agriculture: Economics and Politics , 2001 .