WINNIPEG — Global acceptance of gene-edited crops was looking grim around 2018, thanks to hostile court decisions in the European Union.
Eight years later, the landscape has changed.
Regulatory bodies, the media and the public now have a more positive view of the technology, says an executive with a gene editing company from North Carolina.
Read Also
CCIA prepares to make traceability transition
The Canadian Cattle Identification Agency may not be proposing regulatory changes for traceability, but it’s the one delivering the program.
“Things are progressing really well around the world,” said Dan Jenkins, a vice-president with Pairwise, which is using gene editing to develop new varieties of berries, vegetables and other crops.
Jenkins made the observation last month during a webinar hosted by the Council for Agricultural Science and Technology.
He provided an overview of the regulatory situation for gene-edited crops, a technology where scientists can precisely change the genetic code of a plant to achieve a desired trait.
WHY IT MATTERS: In many countries, gene-edited crops will receive the same oversight as conventional crop breeding.
Jenkins shared a map of the world to illustrate which countries are treating gene-edited crops differently from transgenic, or genetic modification, technology.
Most of South America, Canada, the United States, Japan, Australia, India, the United Kingdom and other nations have decided that gene-edited crops will be lightly regulated.
“(The) global policy trend is very low burden regulations that mainly focus on showing a lack of foreign DNA,” Jenkins said.
This trend is a big shift from 2018, when many experts assumed gene-edited crops were done like dinner.
In July 2018, the European Union Court of Justice published a decision on gene editing.
“(It) ruled that plants created with new gene-editing techniques that don’t involve transferring genes between organisms … must go through the same lengthy approval process as traditional transgenic plants,” science.org reported at the time.
The court decision put a chill on global investment and created a great deal of uncertainty, Jenkins said.
Europe’s position has since shifted.
EU politicians reached a deal in December in which crops developed with “new genomic techniques” would fall into two categories. One would be treated like conventional crops, while the other, with more complex gene editing, will be regulated like GM crops.
The change in Europe is a major win for proponents of the technology and companies like Pairwise.
“The EU right now is doing a great job of turning the ship around,” Jenkins said, adding it’s possible the bloc will have new regulations in place by 2028.
Canada regulates the product rather than the process of developing a new trait or crop variety, so gene-edited crops are treated the same as conventional breeding, provided there is no foreign DNA.
That’s a green light for Canadian companies and plant breeders to use gene editing to improve the nutritional value of crops or increase resistance to fungal disease.
The red light is export markets.
Consumers in countries with massive populations, such as India and China, may accept gene-edited crops and foods — or maybe they won’t.
That uncertainty is forcing countries that export huge volumes of grains, oilseeds and pulses to proceed cautiously with gene-edited varieties.
“Let’s face it, the ag industry is quite excited about this technology. … Farmers are excited about having more tools in the tool box,” Greg Cherewyk, president of Pulse Canada, said in 2024.
“(But) the position really has to be — our key export markets are still reviewing the approach (to gene editing).”
