Genetically modifying the EU food chain

The European Parliament supported plans earlier in 2011 to let member states choose whether or not to ban the cultivation of genetically-modified (GM) crops on their territory. The House voted to amend European Commission proposals for an EU regulation that would allow member states to restrict or ban the cultivation of GM crops, which had already been given approval at EU level.

Parliament’s report lists a number of reasons to allow member states to impose bans, which include socio-economic considerations such as the fragmentation of territory or the conservation of diversity and grounds relating to land use and agricultural practices.

If this proposal was to go through, member states would still not be able to restrict or ban cultivation on health or environmental grounds, as this would continue to be assessed solely by the European Food Safety Authority.

Drafting GM legislation in the EU

The draft legislation has caused widespread debate across the European GM food industry, with many feeling it has little chance of being approved by all 27 member states. Carel du Marchie Sarvaas, director for agricultural biotech at the European Association for Bioindustries (EuropaBio), for example, believes legislation would be fundamentally unacceptable to at least three-quarters of Europe’s member states for a whole host of reasons.

"It’s a political opt-out," he said. "Socio-economic reasons would not stand up in a court of law and there are also questions about whether those reasons are compatible with international trade law or European internal market law."

As well as the legal uncertainties inherent in the regulation, many European governments feel the draft legislation is anti-science. "Using cultural reasons to opt out of a science-based process undermines the credibility of the system," du Marchie Sarvaas said.

Anti-GM sentiment

Anti-GM campaigners, on the other hand, couldn’t be more pleased about this development. "National and regional bans of the cultivation of GM crops could be one of the most efficient instruments to protect against contamination from GM crops," said food campaigner Mute Schimpf, from Friends of the Earth. "More than two-thirds of European citizens are concerned about GM food and we think this proposal supports their demands for high quality products."

Schimpf is realistic, however, about the likelihood of this legislation being passed in the near future. "Currently there is a clear majority in the parliament, but it’s now up to the member states to find a current position. This could be challenging because countries like Spain, the UK, Poland, Germany and France are hesitating to support the legislation."

Flexibility and freedom

The proposed changes to the GMO cultivation laws came about as a result of an evaluation carried out by the European Commission between 2009 and early 2011, which found member states were in support of options that provided them with more flexibility and freedom in the arena of GMO cultivation. However, this is just one small aspect of a regulatory regime that desperately needs a shake up.

The EU authorisation process for GM products currently takes substantially longer than comparable systems around the world. According to a report released by EuropaBio in October 2011, called ‘Approvals of GMOS in the European Union’, one third of the average 45 months it takes to receive approval for a GM product for import in the EU is spent on processing by the European Commission and voting procedures.

The report states the European Commission waits over 11 months on average before it asks member states to vote on a GM product, disregarding the three month deadline set in EU legislation.

Each year, twice as many GM products enter the system than exit it, creating a substantial backlog, which has a knock-on effect for European farmers, the European biotech industry and European trade. Indeed, EuropaBio predicts that 93 GM products will be in the EU system in 2015, meaning trade problems and economic costs resulting from asynchronous authorisations are only set to increase.

Moreover, countries exporting commodities to the EU will become progressively less inclined to wait for EU approvals while European farmers will suffer a competitive disadvantage because of authorisation delays.

"This is stifling biotech innovation across the sector," du Marchie Sarvaas said. "We’ve got brilliant researchers here but they’re emigrating. They’re going to America and so is the money. Billions and billions are being invested in small, medium and large companies in America."

EuropaBio

The recently-released EuropaBio report makes several recommendations on how the EU approval process could be improved, advising the government to set targets to deal with the backlog as well as making efficient application processing a higher political priority and ensuring GM products are put to the vote without delay.

The authors of the report are very clear about the fact that efficiency gains are possible without impacting the thoroughness, completeness or independence of the assessment process.

But this is nothing the European Commission hasn’t heard before. Indeed, its own assessment of the situation, which was released following its industry evaluation, was refreshingly realistic. The evaluation admitted ‘the legislation’s objectives for safety on health and environment remain consistent with the needs of society, but are not being fully met as intended by the legislators.’

It also stated the authorisation process could be more efficient and transparent, particularly as the risk of trade disruptions could become more frequent and severe and affect more products as more GMOs are approved outside Europe. The primary answer, they concluded, is to improve the functioning of the different steps of the authorisation procedure.

While EuropaBio is primarily focused on the impact EU legislation could have on the European biotech industry, campaigners like Schimpf have different quarrels with the EU approval system.

"I think we still have a big lack of knowledge about the mid-term impacts of GM crops both on EU health and on the wider environment," she said. "There are no clear minimum standards when it comes to assessing the safety of GM crops."

So is the current European legislation addressing the concerns of any of the parties involved in the GM food market? For du Marchie Sarvaas, the legislation itself is not at fault. It simply needs to be implemented better. With the number of GM products entering Europe increasing rapidly, this needs to be looked into fast.