Genetically Modified Organisms

1
Lecture 10

• Genetically Modified Organisms

2
What is GM technology?

• Manipulation/ alteration of DNA by transferring
  genes from one organism to another
• Focus so far on crops, cotton and tobacco
• 75 engineered for herbicide tolerance, also
  insect resistance, flavour, storability,
  appearance.

3
Benefits/ Opportunities

• Design crops/ livestock with the right genes
• Add vitamins etc.
• Feed all!

4
Costs/ Concerns

• Uncertainties
• Monopolies
• Consequences for human health environment?
• Loss of biodiversity
• Adding allergens antibiotic markers
• Ethical questions
• Wrong approach!

5
An emerging issue

• Not until mid-1990s
• New awareness coincided with general loss of
  confidence in regulatory systems
• Different responses in the US and the EU
• Differences between North and South

6
The EU Policy

• Started early 1990s
• Objective protect citizens environment while
  simultaneously creating unified biotech market
• Directives 90/220/EEC and 2001/18/EC on
  deliberate release of GMOs
• Policy based on step-by-step approval and
  case-by-case assessment
• Principles on risk assessment, monitoring, access
  to info, labelling, traceability
• Also 10-year reviews, consultations with
  Scientific Committee and European Parliament

7
Furthermore

• EU distinguishes between GMOs intended for
  deliberate release into environment and GMOs
  intended for use as foods/ feeds/ processing.
• UN Biosafety Clearing House involved
• However, Oct 2005 Court of First Instance
  rejected GMO Free Zone in Upper Austria

8
US Policy

• Focus is on final end product, not on process
• No difference between biotech and conventional
  food, therefore no new regulatory framework
• No labelling (exception allergies), considered
  misleading

9
International Level

• Until recently relying on old regimes
• UNEP Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety adopted Jan
  2000, regulates trade in GMOs, compromise,
  effectively legitimising trade, main tool
  advanced informed agreement, disagreement over
  distinction of GM types, also precautionary
  principle relationship with WTO.
• Miami Group versus Like Minded Group
• Global Industry Coalition, chaired by BioteCanada

10
In comparison Stockholm Convention on Persistent
Organic Pollutants (POPs)

• Covers pesticides chemicals that are toxic,
  bioaccumulative, travel long distances
• Do not interfere with DNA but can be devastating
• Regime building smoother, more cooperation
  Convention tougher, more regulatory.
• Large MNCs from the North no longer interested in
  POPs
• Again, split between EU and US, North and South

11
Developing Countries

• Hopes and promises but also concerns
• They are not in control
• They do not have an adequate regulatory system
• Not enough information
• Yet another form of imperialism/ post-colonialism
• Destroying diversity

12
The WTO Dispute

• Formal complaint by USA, Canada, Argentina
• Two Issues suspension and failure to approve
  applications for GM products tolerating member
  states bans of previously approved GM products
  (Aus, F, Ger, Gr, I, Lux)
• Balancing act between economic and normative
  actors
• June 2005 Commission tried to meet US half way
  by proposing lift of national bans. However,
  blocking minority in Council of Ministers
• Latest Panel decision deferred until next year

13
Conclusions

• GMOs highlight the cross-boundary and global
  dimensions of environmental politics
• GMOs contributed towards the deep divisions
  between US and EU, North and South
• There are scientific uncertainties and different
  interpretations of the issue
• The influence of non-state actors is significant
• Many features are typical for environmental
  politics, others are unique