A new EU framework for gene-edited plants is needed. But why exactly?

If you follow the discussions in Brussels around New Genomic Techniques (NGTs) you have certainly noticed contrasting voices – unshakeable support from some and passionate opposition from others towards these tools. This is business as usual in the bubble but by focusing too much on the merits of the technology itself we risk missing an important part of the picture. New legislation for NGTs is required to restore legal certainty, protect the integrity of the single market, and avoid trade frictions. The support for new rules should not be simply a measurement of one’s personal fondness of NGTs, but also reflect one’s consideration of other important aspects.

Where we stand today

NGTs are tools that enhance the precision and speed of plant breeding. Genetic changes that could take decades with conventional breeding can be obtained much faster and with fewer unintended effects using NGTs. These changes can vary widely, from resistance to pest, drought tolerance, and higher yields, to enhanced nutritional composition and better taste.

Currently, plants obtained through NGTs are regulated as Genetically Modified Organisms (GMOs) even in cases where the final product is identical to conventional plants, or, in other words, when the same genetic changes could have been obtained through conventional breeding methods or simply have happened in nature. It’s a textbook case of innovation outpacing regulation.

“So what?” you may be wondering. “Why can’t they stay regulated as GMOs?” Being the GMO legislation our bread and butter at CropLife Europe, I hope to help you answer that question.

The need for a new framework

There are numerous reasons why a new NGT framework is needed. For starters, the current legislation leads to different rules being applied to identical products. This is not just legally inconsistent, it is also a pricy choice. It creates significant regulatory divergence with our trade partners, the vast majority of which do not regulate conventional-like NGTs as GMOs. In addition, it negatively impacts R&I in the EU. The high costs of bringing a new GM trait to the market – USD 115 million, out of which 37,6% is spent during the regulatory phase – represent an extremely high entry barrier that drives smaller players out of the market.

There is however another aspect of the current legislation that I believe deserves more attention than it has received so far: the fact that it simply cannot be implemented.