Cultivation Of Genetically Modified Organisms Research Articles

The precautionary principle and genetically modified organisms: A bone of contention between European institutions and member states.

This manuscript examines how the Precautionary Principle has been applied to provide a mechanism for protection of the environment and health in response to the introduction of Genetically Modified Organisms (GMOs) in Europe. It discusses how the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) handled national requests across four cases in which Member States had failed in their attempt to trigger the Precautionary Principle in order to uphold a ban or suspension of the cultivation or sale of GMOs in their territory. The analysis of these judgements suggests that the court has applied a narrow interpretation to the scientific evidence emerging from risk assessments, and has thereby limited the potential for precautionary measures by Member States to be upheld by the court. This outcome reflects a `weak' application of the Precautionary Principle by the court in contrast with the `moderate' formulation and `strong' interpretation of the principle offered by the European legal framework. Moreover, the analysis highlights that the CJEU's rulings are not keeping pace with the development of the European normative framework which considers the Precautionary Principle as a key tenet and, through the 2015 Directive, enables Member States to ban GMO cultivation without referring to scientific evidence.

The 2017 Fidenato case and the 2015 Directive: The curious case of GMOs in Europe

The 2017 Fidenato case is the first legal dispute on the cultivation of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) decided by the Court of Justice of the European Union after the adoption of Directive 2015/412. The Directive allows for the exclusion of genetically modified cultivation from a national territory on grounds unrelated to scientific uncertainty. As in the 2007 Austrian case, in Fidenato the Court of Justice rejected the precautionary request from Italy to ban the cultivation of GMOs. The ruling centres on the argument of a ban being scientifically unfounded. This article discusses how the lack of harmonization between the European jurisprudence on the cultivation of GMOs and recent normative amendments introduced through the 2015 Directive affects the regulatory autonomy of Member States in adopting measures that ensure the protection of human health and the environment (i.e. biosafety) from the potential harmful effects posed by GMOs.

The Regulation of Genetically Modified Organisms on a Local Level: Exploring the Determinants of Cultivation Bans

This study investigates municipalities’ regulatory activities in the field of Genetically Modified Organisms (GMOs) for agricultural use. To explore the determinants of these activities, the case of Germany was selected as in this country, municipalities have legal possibilities to impose local GMO cultivation bans. Using data from 131 local council resolutions, the combination of qualitative and quantitative content analysis shows that, in most cases, no single factors, but a variety of factors lead to regulatory activity. The study reveals that functional motivations to prevent negative socio-economic effects or impacts on the environment or human health are decisive for municipalities’ decisions to regulate. Furthermore, the results of the quantitative analysis unveil that municipalities often refer to both socio-economic reasons and risks for the environment and human health when justifying their decisions. Moreover, the results indicate that local policymakers impose popular cultivation bans to promote their own political success. Finally, the horizontal diffusion of regulations between municipalities, but also vertical diffusion from higher political levels can be observed. Overall, the results of this study on GMOs on a local level further emphasize the importance of analyzing the interdependencies between agroecosystems and socio-economic systems in their full complexity.

유전자변형작물의 개발 현황 및 안전관리 동향

Genetically modified organisms (GMOs) are created by biotechnology to improve crop production. The commercialization and commercial cultivation of GMOs are gradually increasing. The area planted with genetically modified crops, which was only 1.7 million hectares in 1996, increased by 18.51 million hectares in 2016. Compared to 1996, it has increased by more than 100 times. The country that grows the most genetically modified crops is the United States; the area of cultivation in the United States is 72.9 million hectares. The cultivation area of genetically modified crops is increasing annually in the world, in the order of Brazil (49.1 million hectares), Argentina (2.380 million hectares), Canada (1.160 million hectares), and India (10.80 million hectares). Korea has not yet grown genetically modified crops, but it has been importing genetically modified crops for food and feed since 2001. In 2016, 22.4 million tons (21%) were imported for food and 77.4 million tons (79%) were imported for feed. In addition, many genetically modified crops, including rice, pepper, soybean, and grass, have been developed by research institutes, universities, and companies, and some of these crops are expected to be put into practical use soon in Korea at the safety evaluation stage. The number of genetically modified crops has increased steadily worldwide to benefit societies, but these crops may pose risks to the ecological environment and to human health and therefore require careful regulation. This study investigated the current status of genetically modified crops, both domestically and overseas, and examined the safety management trends and labeling systems for GMOs.

Genetically modified organisms (GMO) in opinions completing secondary schools in Lublin

Abstract The objective of the conducted analysis is the opinion of adolescents completing secondary schools concerning genetically modified organisms (GMO) and determination of the relationship between the level of knowledge concerning GMO, and evaluation of the safety of their use in industry and agriculture. The scope of problems undertaken was elaborated based on the survey studies conducted on a group of 500 adolescents completing secondary schools from the Lublin Region, including 250 attending general profile secondary schools and 250 from agricultural technical schools. The study was conducted by the method of a diagnostic survey, using the questionnaire technique. The results of the study showed that the respondents perceived both positive and negative aspects of producing genetically modified (GM) products. These evaluations were significantly related with the respondents’ level of knowledge concerning GMO. The higher the level of knowledge, the more positive the evaluations of the adolescents concerning the cultivation and breeding of GMO, and more frequent indications that the consumption of products manufactured from these organisms is safe.

A Growing Impasse: The Future of the EU's GMO Regime

In the spring of 2014, the Greek presidency of the Council of the EU tabled a revised version of a 2010 proposal that promises to allow Member States to restrict or prohibit the commercial cultivation of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) on whole or part of their territory. This study seeks to answer the question: does the proposal for partial renationalisation of the EU’s regulatory regime for the cultivation of GMOs provide an adequate solution to its current problems? It finds that the EU’s GMO regime has to this day failed to accommodate national diversity prior to authorisation through central deliberation and that it does not provide Member States with opportunities for substantial differentiation post-authorisation. An in-depth legal analysis of the Greek proposal, however, shows that the proposal is unlikely to fill this legal vacuum by empowering Member States to impose cultivation bans after authorisation, while the exercise of their newfound autonomy may well be restricted by EU internal market and international WTO law. Whereas this study makes recommendations for a more adequate redistribution of competences, it also calls into question whether renationalisation is the best solution for the regime’s problems. It thus examines the practical consequences of re-emphasising national frontiers when dealing with a cross-boundary issue like GMO cultivation, and briefly discusses underexplored opportunities to improve the inclusiveness of the EU’s centralised risk-assessment and risk-management procedures.

Divided in Diversity: Reforming The EU’s GMO Regime

AbstractThis article analyses the recent reform to the EU’s genetically modified organisms (GMO) regime which allows Member States to restrict the cultivation of GMO on their territory for reasons that do not relate to issues of health and safety or the environment. By allowing for national differentiation – although on legally questionable grounds – new Article 26b of Directive 2001/18/EC has been presented as a solution to overcome the impasse in GMO decision-making. However, this article finds that the reform fails to provide a solution for the EU regime’s most pressing problem, namely its disregard for scientific uncertainty and disagreement.

The development of a GIS-based public GMO location register considering the needs of the EU Member States

The Directive 2001/18/EC regulates the deliberate release of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) into the environment. EU Member States are obligated by this Directive to establish location register to inform the public where GMOs are released into the environment. As a partner within the EU-project PRICE, the German Federal Office of Consumer Protection and Food Safety (BVL) developed a modern, GIS-based location register (GLOREG) for GMOs adaptable to the different needs of the EU member states. Using a questionnaire the BVL asked the Competent Authorities (CAs) under the Directive 2001/18/EC and CAs of non-EU countries in Europe about detailed background information of their current location registers. Most of EU-Member States already implemented the Directive into national law, even if they do not perform any deliberate release or cultivation of GMOs in their country. The CAs distinguish between deliberate release (mostly ‘experiments’) and cultivation of GMOs within their national regulations and notification rules. National regulations also vary regarding the organization of cadastral data in the agrarian landscape. GLOREG considers these differences with adaptable software and modular components. Furthermore, spatial information of GMOs are covered by Directive 2007/2/EC (INSPIRE) and must therefore comply with its requirements for the interoperability of spatial data.

Rapid detection of genetic modification for GMO monitoring in agriculture

Transgenic technology has expanded the ways of new genetic variability creation. Genetically modified organisms (GMOs) are organisms which total genome is altered in a way that could not happen in nature. GM crops recorded a steady increase in its share in agricultural production. However, for the most part, GMO in agriculture has been limited to two cultivars - soy and corn, and the two genetic modifications, the total herbicide resistance and pest of the Lepidoptera genus. In order to monitor cultivation and trade of GMOs, tests of different precision are used, qualitatively and/or quantitatively determining the presence of genetic modification. Tests for the rapid determination of the presence of GM are suitable, since they can be implemented quickly and accurately, in terms of declared sensitivity, outside or in the laboratory. The example of the use of rapid tests demonstrates their value in use for rapid and efficient monitoring.

The Cultivation of Genetically Modified Organisms in the European Union: A Necessary Trade‐Off?

AbstractThis article analyzes the reasons why in 2010 the European Commission proposed a legislative framework on genetically modified organisms (GMOs) that could give some powers back to the Member States. This legislative proposal is puzzling since it moves the centre of decision‐making regarding the cultivation of GMOs from the EU level back to the domestic level and it also contradicts the generally acknowledged behaviour of the Commission as a competence maximizer. Using a multilevel governance perspective and based on an extensive literature review and semi‐structured interviews, the article examines the dynamics and relationships between the various levels of governance that generated pressures on the Commission to issue this counterintuitive proposal. The findings suggest that the Commission is making a (necessary) trade‐off between, on the one hand, the respect of international obligations and the preservation of the internal market, and on the other hand, internal pressures towards stricter regulation of GMOs.

Agricultural Biotechnology in Central and Eastern Europe: Determinants of Cultivation Bans

AbstractBy the joining of the European Union (EU), the Central and Eastern European states had to align their agricultural biotechnology regulations to EU standards. In some cases, this meant the adoption of stricter regulations such as for the co‐existence of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) and conventional crops. In other cases, harmonisation with EU rules entailed the need to give up more restrictive national regulation, for example: to allow the cultivation of a limited number of GMOs. This article examines why some Central and Eastern European states joined the group of Western European countries that instituted bans on the commercial cultivation of GMOs in the EU. This study contributes to the literature in two ways. First, it contends that the prohibition of the commercial cultivation of GMOs in some Central and Eastern European member states must be interpreted in light of the EU‐wide public and political contestation of GMOs. Second, this piece of research shows that the ideological composition of governments matters in explaining the regulation of agricultural biotechnology. This second contribution allows for going beyond the predominant focus on public opinion when analysing the regulation of GMOs in the EU.

The use of existing environmental networks for the post-market monitoring of GM crop cultivation in the EU.

The European Union (EU) Directive 2001/18/EC on the deliberate release of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) into the environment requires that both Case-Specific Monitoring (CSM) and General Surveillance (GS) are considered as post-market implementing measures. Whereas CSM is directed to monitor potential adverse effects of GMOs or their use identified in the environmental risk assessment, GS aims to detect un-intended adverse effects of GMOs or their use on human and animal health or the environment. Guidance documents on the monitoring of genetically modified (GM) plants from the Commission and EFSA clarify that, as appropriate, GS can make use of established routine surveillance practices. Networks involved in routine surveillance offer recognised expertise in a particular domain and are designed to collect information on important environmental aspects over a large geographical area. However, as the suitability of existing monitoring networks to provide relevant data for monitoring impacts of GMOs is not known, plant biotechnology companies developed an approach to describe the processes and criteria that will be used for selecting and evaluating existing monitoring systems. In this paper, the availability of existing monitoring networks for this purpose is evaluated. By cataloguing the existing environmental monitoring networks in the EU, it can be concluded that they can only be used, in the context of GMO cultivation monitoring, as secondary tools to collect baseline information.

The Development and Validation of the GMOAS, an Instrument Measuring Secondary School Students' Attitudes Towards Genetically Modified Organisms

Genetically modified organisms (GMOs) is a rapidly evolving area of scientific innovation and an issue receiving global attention. Attempts to devise usable instruments that assess people's attitudes towards this innovation have been rare and non-systematic. The aim of this paper is to present the development and validation of the genetically modified organisms attitudes scale (GMOAS), an instrument measuring secondary school students' attitudes towards GMOs. The responses of 1,111 secondary school students from Cyprus were used to validate the instrument. Principal component analysis with varimax rotation revealed a clear three-factor solution explaining 45.8% of the total variance. The factors underlying the attitudes' construct are: GMO implications on health, Interest in the topic of GMOs, and GMO implications on the environment. The 16-item, five-point Likert-type GMOAS showed satisfactory internal consistency and discriminant validity. When the instrument was used to analyse data from Cyprus, results revealed that Cypriot secondary school students have rather non-supportive attitudes towards the cultivation and use of GMOs. Male students were less negative in using GMOs for health and environmental purposes than females. Females, however, were found to be more interested in learning about GMOs. These findings comply with the rather country-specific nature of GMO attitudes.

Implications of GMO cultivation and monitoring-series

Genetic engineering is a technological approach that allows for the application of new genetic material across species borders. It is assumed to yield specific benefits, e.g., increased food production, decreased use of pesticides and herbicides, and improved food quality. However, after more than a decade of commercial experience in some countries outside Europe, it seems apparent that several initial expectations could not be met, for example, the overall reduction in pesticide use. Unlike chemicals that degrade by time, genetically modified organisms (GMO) as well as their decomposition products have the potential to proliferate and persist in the environment, eventually without the possibility of removing them once they have been released. Thus, concerns have been raised about potential adverse environmental impacts of the GMO and about potential implications on the coexistence between conventional and genetically modified production. This makes risk assessment as well as monitoring highly challenging tasks towards minimising the risk of adverse effects. Ecological, agricultural and economic implications resulting from the cultivation of GMO at large spatial scales are currently discussed in science, administration and in the context of agricultural practice. A challenging task in this context is how to assess large-scale and long-term effects of GMO release in the approval procedure, in the planning of coexistence measures and in post-market monitoring regarding environmental as well as food monitoring. The international conference ‘Implications of GM Crop Cultivation at Large Spatial Scales’ (GMLS) was held at the University of Bremen first in April 2008. In March 2010, a second edition of the conference (GMLS II) was initiated. Presenters from 11 European and overseas nations contributed new scientific findings on risk analysis of GMO and largescale assessments of environmental effects. As it was for the first GMLS conference in 2008, the results were documented on the website http://www.gmls.eu. Topics include empirical work concerning findings on GM traits, dispersal of GMO, and possible effects on nontarget organisms as well as risk assessment, theoretical concepts and methodological aspects such as modelling and data analysis facing large spatial and temporal dimensions. Strategic implications for good governance and approaches for unknown effects have been discussed from a social-ecological perspective. GMLS is part of the studies on systemic risks funded by the BMBF in the call on Social Ecological research. In this context, scientific findings are linked to social considerations on how nature and the human society mutually influence each other. This interdisciplinary approach aims at a deeper understanding of the following mutual response: How do social actions shape the environment, and, vice versa, how do environmental processes impact the success of social activities–agriculture as well as other natural resource uses. This special series publishes some key contributions presented at the GMLS II conference. The articles describe different aspects of large-scale cultivation of GMOs: Overview of the series, thematically oriented:

Cultivation of GMO in Germany: support of monitoring and coexistence issues by WebGIS technology

BackgroundIn Germany, apart from the Amflora potato licensed for cultivation since March 2010, Bt-maize MON810 is the only genetically modified organisms (GMO) licensed for commercial cultivation (about 3,000 ha in 2008). Concerns have been raised about potential adverse environmental impacts of the GMO and about potential implications on the coexistence between conventional and genetically modified production. These issues should be considered on a regional base. The objective of this article is to describe how GMO monitoring that is required after risk assessment and GMO release can be complemented by a Web-based geoinformation system (WebGIS). Secondly, it is also described how WebGIS techniques might support coexistence issues with regard to Bt-maize cultivation and conservation areas. Accordingly, on the one hand, the WebGIS should enable access to relevant geodata describing the receiving environment, including information on cultivation patterns and conservation areas containing protected species and habitats. On the other hand, metadata on already established environmental monitoring networks should be provided as well as measurement data of the intended GMO monitoring. Based on this information and based on the functionality provided by the WebGIS, the application helps in detecting possible environmental GMO impacts and in avoiding or identifying coexistence problems.ResultsThe WebGIS applies Web mapping techniques to generate maps via internet requests and offers additional functionality for analysis, processing and publication of selected geodata. It is based on open source software solely. The developments rely on a combination of the University of Minnesota (UMN ) MapServer with the Apache HTTP server, the open source database management systems MySQL and PostgreSQL and the graphical user interface provided by Mapbender. Important information on the number and the location of Bt-maize fields were derived from the GMO location register of BVL. The "WebGIS GMO Monitoring" provides different tools allowing for the application of basic GIS techniques as, for instance, automatic or interactive zooming, distance measurements or querying attribute information from selected GIS layers. More sophisticated GIS tools were implemented additionally, e.g. a buffer function which enables generating buffers around selected geo-objects like Bt-maize fields. Finally, a function for intersection of different maps was developed. The WebGIS comprises information on the location of all Bt-maize fields in Germany according to the official GMO location register of the Federal Office of Consumer Protection and Food Safety between 2005 and 2008. It facilitates, amongst others, access to geodata of GMO fields and their surroundings and can relate them with additional environmental data on climate, soil, and agricultural patterns. Furthermore, spatial data on the location of flora-fauna-habitats and environmental monitoring sites in the federal state of Brandenburg were integrated.The WebGIS GMO monitoring was implemented according to the concept for an "Information System for Monitoring GMO" (ISMO) which was designed on behalf of the German Federal Agency for Nature Conservation. ISMO includes hypotheses-based ecological effects of GMO cultivation and suggests checkpoints for GMO monitoring to test whether impacts may be observed in the receiving environment.In contrast to the public GMO register, the WebGIS GMO monitoring enables mapping of GMO fields and provides relevant geodata describing environmental and agricultural conditions in their neighbourhood of the cultivation sites as well as information derived from monitoring sites. On this basis, spatial analyses should be enabled and supported, respectively. Further, the WebGIS GMO monitoring supplements PortalU which, in Germany, is the technical realisation of the Infrastructure for Spatial Information in Europe directive (Directive 2007/2/EC) released by the EU in 2007.ConclusionsThe article should have shown how to support and complement GMO monitoring with the help of the WebGIS application. It facilitates co-operation and data access across spatial scales for different users since it is based on internet technologies. The WebGIS improves storage, analysis, management and presentation of spatial data. Apart from the improved flow of information, it supports future long-term GMO monitoring and modelling of the dispersal of transgenic pollen, for instance. Additional information (e.g. data on wind conditions or soil observation sites) provided by the WebGIS will be helpful to determine representative monitoring sites for detecting potential GMO impacts by means of monitoring or modelling. Thus, the WebGIS can also serve as part of an early warning system. In the near future, the integration of locations of all Bt-maize fields in Germany into the WebGIS as a continuous task should be automatised. Additionally, a methodology should be developed to detect maize fields by means of remote sensing data to manage coexistence problems on the basis of actual field patterns.

What Price Flexibility? – The Recent Commission Proposal to Allow for National “Opt-Outs” on GMO Cultivation under the Deliberate Release Directive and the Comitology Reform Post-Lisbon

“After a reform is before another reform.” This paraphrasing of a famous saying from the world of football seems to be a very fitting way to describe the status quo of the European policy on genetically modified organisms (GMOs).

The Commission's New Approach to the Cultivation of Genetically Modified Organisms

The Commission has proposed to legitimise the renationalization of the cultivation of GMOs (Genetically Modified Organisms) accepting the request of a group of Member States who raised concerns at the Environment Council of June 2009 regarding the EU-wide decisions on GMO2cultivation.

Systemic Risks of Genetically Modified Organisms in Crop Production: Interdisciplinary Perspective

The GeneRisk research consortium analysed the implications of the cultivation of genetically modified organisms (GMO). The risks involved transcend the borders of very different systems. Therefore, they need to be analysed using interdisciplinary and transdisciplinary approaches. One central scientific issue was the assessment of the spatial implications of GMO cultivation for areas of large extent, examining Bt-maize as the currently most relevant GM crop and oilseed rape as an additional example.

The proposed Amendments to the German Biotechnology Law: Progress or Setback for Biotechnology in Germany?

AbstractOn 8 August 2007 the German federal government has approved a draft legislative package introducing changes to the biotechnology laws and regulations. This is already the second time the current government has amended the rules and procedures regarding genetically modified organisms (GMOs). The new draft is aimed at fulfilling the government coalition agreement to advance research and application of biotechnology in Germany. This article will provide an overview of the proposed amendments and briefly analyse to what extend the aim of advancing biotechnology has been achieved. The author argues that the draft introduces a number of amendments with the potential of advancing biotechnology research and of appeasing the farming community on the issue of cultivation of GMOs. However, a number of fundamental policy choices regarding biotechnology have been left unaltered. The author therefore concludes that this draft does not lead to a paradigmatic change regarding biotechnology policy in Germany.

Presentation and comments on EU legislation related to food industries–environment interactions: sustainable development, and protection of nature and biodiversity – genetically modified organisms

SummaryThe European Union (EU) legislation regarding sustainable development moves along two distinct lines: the impact of industries (food industries included) on the environment (release of gases and green house effect and the effect of cultivating genetically modified organisms (GMOs) on the environment. EU voted three communications [COM(2002)524, COM(2003)301, COM(2004)38] in an attempt to set an action plan based on technologies to manage pollution, by promoting less polluting and less resource‐intensive products and services and ways to manage resources more efficiently. As such environment‐friendly technologies pervade practically all economic activities and sectors it is anticipated that they will reduce effectively energy and resource consumption thereby creating fewer emissions and less waste. As regards the cultivation and/or importing of GMOs, EU legislation was based on two directives (E.U. 90/219/EEC, E.U. 2001/18/EC) and four regulations [Regulation (EC) No. 258/97, Regulation (EC) No. 1830/2003, Regulation (EC) No. 1830/2003 and Regulation (EC) No. 1946/2003]. The directives aimed at adopting measures for limited use of GM micro‐organisms, making the procedure for granting consent to the deliberate release and placing on the market of GMOs more efficient and more transparent, making GMO labelling compulsory and thereby enhancing GMOs traceability along the entire food chain.