Domestic and International Perspectives

1
Domestic and International Perspectives of
Biotechnology
Workshop for Adult Educators October 13, 2003
Phil McClean Department of Plant Sciences North
Dakota State University
2
Precautionary Principle Why Europe Regulates
Biotech Products

• Precautionary Principle States
• Commercial activities can be restricted by
  governments
• IF a scientific or environment risk is perceived
  
• EVEN IF conclusive data is NOT YET available
• It is
• A key principle that underlies European Union
  approaches
• to regulating biotech products
• Incorporated into the Maastricht Treaty that
  lead to
• the formation of the EU
• Key component of Cartagena Protocol on
  Biosafety
• Requires products be proven safe before release

3
Precautionary Principle
Effects of Applying the Principle

• The principle makes it difficult to
• determine when risk avoidance should take
  precedence
• over the general welfare
• At its most basic, the principle
• Regulates mans excitement of the new and novel
• Can prevent the most unexpected damage from
  occurring
• As interpreted the principle requires that
• Biotech products should be regulated until
• compelling evidence proves they are safe

4
History Of US/EU Disagreement

• 1990 EU approval process implemented
• 1995 US approves first biotech crops
• 1995-1998 EU approves nine biotech crops
• 1997 Individual countries override EU
  approvals
• Austria, France, Germany, Greece,
• Luxembourg EU doesnt react
• 1998 Last biotech crop approved (carnation)
• 1999 Moratorium on new approvals
• implemented

5
US Calls This An Illegal Moratorium

• US believe this is an illegal moratorium
• US believe EU is not following WTO policy
• This position is a trade barrier
• Trade barriers violate WTO policy
• Barriers are losing US producers money
• Moratorium hurting those in need of the
• valuable commodities

6
US Forces The Issue The WTO Case

• May 13, 2003
• US files WTO case against perceived EU
  moratorium
• Case jointly filed by
• US, Canada, Argentina, and Egypt
• Case supported by
• Australia, Chile, Colombia, El Salvador,
  Honduras,
• Mexico, New Zealand, Peru and Uruguay

7
The Latest in the US/EU Biotech Confrontation

• May 21, 2003
• Bush Europe moratorium causing famine in Africa
• Reference to refusal of some African countries
• to accept GMO food aid
• May 22, 2003
• EU defends it policies moratorium is based on
• scientific evidence
• May 29, 2003
• Egypt drops from the suit

8
The Latest in the US/EU Biotech Confrontation
(cont.)

• July 2, 2003
• New regulations approved by EU
• Labeling Rationale
• Allows consumers to make a choice
• Level
• Greater than 0.9
• Required label
• This product is produced from GMO
• Traceability
• Requires segregation of GMOs

9
The Latest in the US/EU Biotech Confrontation
(cont.)

• July 23, 2003
• EU release guidelines governing GMOs for Member
  States
• Based on principle of co-existence
• Principle should be adopted by individual
• Member States
• Not a one size fits all solution
• National solutions should follow the principles
• Biotech adopters should be responsible for
  limiting mixtures
• National liability rules will be followed

10
The Latest in the US/EU Biotech Confrontation
(cont.)

• Sept 4, 2003
• African nations respond to WTO case
• Ethopian EPA director made announcement
• Feel that if they choose to follow the
  Cartagena Protocol
• US will sue them in WTO court
• Feel it is their responsibility to consider the
  appropriateness
• of GMOs
• Threats to their sovereignty are not correct

11
Quotes from the Press Release
Developing world agriculture systems are adapted
to their geography, economy and culture, and GM
farming systems that require capital and
chemicals threaten our agriculture and food
security.
And we resent the way that the stereotyped image
of the hungry in developing countries has been
used to force a style of agriculture that will
only exacerbate problems of hunger and
poverty. The arguments that the EU must give
up its right to label, or even reject GM,
because of the developing countries must stop.
We have the right to implement the Biosafety
Protocol, and we must do so without delay.
12
The Latest in the US/EU Biotech Confrontation
(cont.)

• Sept 26, 2003
• Levels for seed purity in Europe debated
• For organic and conventional seeds
• 0.3 and 0.7 contamination level proposed

13
European Consumer Attitudes Toward Biotech Crops
Themes Observed in Recent Surveys

• Uncertainty about the issues (1994, 1997, 1998)
• Caution is necessary when dealing with complex,
• technical issues (1998)
• Labeling of foods is strongly desired (1994,
  1998)
• Biotech has less promise than other technologies
  (1997)
• Medical uses of biotechnology preferred over
  food uses (1994)
• In UK, 5 to 1 against GM crops 37,000 responses
  (2003)

Surveys 1994 UK National Consensus
Conference 1997 Eurobarometer 1998 Iceland
Frozen Food Survey 2003 http//www.thecampaign.or
g/News/sept03h.php5
14
Other European Concerns About Biotechnology

• Biotech crops will be introduced against the
  will of the public
• Precedence exists in Indonesia
• 1960s Government required that Green
  revolution
• cereals be grown
• It is feared the same will occur with biotech
  crops
• Vegetarians fear animal genes will be added to
  plant foods
• Producer, not consumer, innovations will be
  favored
• Producer savings will not be passed on to the
  public
• Foreign DNA will be absorbed by humans
• Unknown allergens will be introduced
• Long-term risk to human health not known

15
How UK Organizations Responded To Recent Public
Controversies
Irradiated Food

• An effective method of protecting against
• food-borne pathogens
• 1980s
• Idea proposed
• Factories built
• 1990s
• Public objected
• Process never implemented

16
How UK Organizations Responded To Public
Objections
Tomato Puree Example

• Zeneca released a GM tomato product
• Processed at lower temperature
• Less carmelization
• Fresher tasting
• Rated highly in blind taste tests
•  
• Own Brand puree sold with GM label
• Outsold non-GM 6040 in Safeway stores
• Sales 30 less in Sainsbury stores
• Sainsbury dropped the product because of
  consumer
• objections

17
Buying Power of Large Companies Controls
Biotechnology Acceptance
McDonalds Corporation

• Largest purchaser of potatoes in the world
• Originally purchased insect resistant GM
  potatoes
• Changed policy over potential consumer
  objections
• Monsanto discontinued production of insect
  resistant
• GM potatoes

18
Buying Power of Large Companies Controls
Biotechnology Acceptance
Heinz

• Large producer of canned beans
• Europe a major market for canned beans
• Heinz declared they would not buy GM beans (even
• though they were not available)
• Research to develop GM beans is essentially
  non-existent

19
Principles Objections to Biotech Crops
General Topics

• Unknown health risks
• Damage to the environment
• The science is unnatural
• Multinational corporations are controlling the
  technology
• Benefits are profit not health relate

20
Principles Objections to Biotech Crops
Perceived Health Risks

• Originated in Europe
• Related to the uncertainty over the Mad Cow
  disease crisis
• Public does not trust government statements
  regarding
• the safety of the technology
• Safety of biotech foods not demonstrated to
  their satisfaction
• Why risk your health when the benefits from the
  crop
• are not health related

21
Principles Objections to Biotech Crops
Environmental Risks

• Herbicide resistant crops encourage more
  chemical usage
• Resistance genes could migrate to related weeds
• Weed control would then not be possible
• Non-target species could be damaged
• Monarch butterfly controversy

22
Principles Objections to Biotech Crops
Multinational Corporations Control the Technology

• Only a few companies control the technology
• The corporations are forcing non-biotech crops
  to the market
• Leads to further industrialization of agriculture

23
Environmental Issues Related to Biotech Crops
Recent History

• The Environment Has Many Historical Advocates
• Rachel Carson Effects of DDT
• 1970s Earth Day Movement
• 1980s EPA director becomes a cabinet level
  position
• 1980s - 2000s The Green movement becomes
  worldwide
•  
• Environmental advocacy is a now a worldwide
  movement

24
Environmental Concerns About Biotech Crops

• Escape of Transgenes into Wild Species
• Only an issue with crops that have weeds they
  can cross with
• Wheat and Johnson Grass
•  
• Dependence on Chemical Usage
• Volunteer RR crops appear in following year
• Control of these will require more harmful
  chemicals
•  
• Insect Tolerant Crops
• Provide an effective tool for corn and cotton
• Target insects are clearly controlled
• Non-target insects may be affected

25
Environmental Benefits Of Biotech Crops

• Scare environmental resources saved
• Reduced herbicide and pesticide usage
• which means
• Reduced number of applications
• which means
• Reduced usage (and dependence) on oil
•  
• Farming systems better maintained
• Planting herbicide resistant crops in untilled
  fields
• Reduces moisture loss
• Untilled soil helps prevent erosion

26
Crop Biotechnology Has Supporters
Relevant Quotes
The agricultural scientists and farmers all over
the world who improve our crops are the true
heroes of our time.   We have not seen any
evidence of these scenarios (super weeds and
super bacteria) even though we have been testing
these GI crops for 20 years and they have been
eaten by millions of people on a daily basis
since 1996.   We believe that agriculture can
be less ecologically damaging and more
sustainable, and that GI crops can play a
positive role in this development.  
Martin Crispeels,
Director, San Diego Center for Molecular
Agriculture
27
Reasons to Adopt the Best Technologies for Crop
Improvement
Feeding People

• World population will double to 9 million by 2050
• Feeding everyone will be important
• Liberal societies, like the US, believe
• It is our moral obligation to alleviate hunger

28
Hunger A Major Health Issue
General Facts

• 25-30 Million Children Are Underfed
• Malnutrition is the cause of 54 of child
  mortality in
• developing African countries (WHO statistics)
• Other Effects of Malnutrition
• Stunted growth
• Reduced mental development
• Susceptibility to diseases
• Blindness

29
Hunger Is Also A Security Issue
Hungry people are angry Angry people seek change

• Recent Example
• Food was scare in early 1970s in the former
  Eastern Bloc
• countries
• Food strikes occurred in Poland in early 1970s
• Former Soviet Union forced to buy grain
• on the open market
• Purchases seen as a failure of their economic
  system
• These strikes created the first anti-Soviet
  dissident
• groups that lead to the fall of the Soviet
  Union
• in the late 1980s.

30
Organic Farming Is Not The Answer To World Hunger

• Organic Farming Rejects
• Pesticides
• Synthetic fertilizers
• Herbicides
•  
• And Accepts
• Biological control of insects
• Manure as a fertilizer
• Mechanical (with tractors) removal of weeds

Organic farming data from Foods from
Genetically Improved Crops in Africa"
31
How Much Can Organic Farming Produce?

• Organic Farming
• Can feed about 3 billion people
• But not the 10 billion projected for the future
•  
• Why?
• Biological control is not complete and yields
  reduced
• Land must be set aside for animal production to
  produce
• the manure
• Nutrients are extracted from the soil at a
  greater rate
• than they are returned
• Crop rotations do not completely replenish
  nutrients
• to the soil

32
Biotech Crops Producer vs. Consumer Products
Producer-Friendly Biotech Crops

• Harvested product is not altered
• Producers cost reduced
• Examples
• Herbicide resistance
• Insect resistance
• Virus resistance

33
Consumer Products On The Horizon
Consumer-Friendly Biotech Crops

• Harvested product has added value to the
  consumer
• Producer may receive a premium
• Examples
• Reduced food allergens
• Increased micronutrient content
• Increased N content of cereal crops
• Edible vaccines

34
Essential Principles Guiding Policy Evaluation
Principles Used for Public Decision Making
General Welfare Institutions (public and private)
work to protect citizen interests
Peoples Right The freedom to choose to use or
not use biotech products
Justice Burdens and benefits are shared by ALL
involved
Adopted from Genetically Modified Crops The
Ethical and Social Issues Nuffeld Council on
Bioethics
35
How These Guiding Principles Apply
to Biotechnology Products
General Welfare

• In a liberal society, our intuitions promote and
  protect
• the welfare of its citizens
• Tools of technology can promote and protect
  citizen welfare
• But what are the costs (social and economic)
  associated with
• the adoption of technology products
• What about biotechnology products?
• Are the products (reduced chemical usage,
  improved
• nutrition) safe or hazardous?

36
Society Tries to Balance Competing Concerns
Hunger vs. Environment

• Healthy people are valued
• Abundant food supplies reduce hunger
• This promotes the general welfare of the society

• But a diverse environment is also valued
• Are the biotech products endangering the
  diversity?
• Should reducing hunger or maintaining diversity
  be
• valued more?

37
How Are These Guiding Principles Apply to
Biotechnology Products
Peoples Rights

• Can the public choose NOT to come in contact
• with biotech products?
• How does this conflict with commercial
  concerns?
• What weight should each carry?

38
Balancing Rights and Interests
European Citizens vs. US Commercial Interests

• Many European want to avoid biotech foods
• This is their personal right
• US producers and the government have resisted
  labeling
• It is viewed as a restraint to free trade
• BUT without labeling, it is difficult for
  Europeans
• exercise their right to avoid biotech foods

39
Exercising Personal Rights The Cost of Choice

• Some may choose to not eat biotech foods
• Labeling is necessary to exercise this choice
• Labeling adds a cost to the producer
• The cost is passed on to the consumer
• BUT consumers not concerned about biotech foods
  pay
• an additional cost
• Therefore the choice of one group is a burden
• on another group

40
Exercising Personal Rights Obligations
Choice and Obligation

• In a biotech world, some may choose not to eat
  biotech products
• What if there is not an alternative?
• Is it a right to have a non-biotech alternative
• Should the producer community be obligated to
  produce
• a similar non-biotech product?
• If demand is great enough, that product will be
  produced.

41
How These Guiding Principles Apply
to Biotechnology Products
Justice

• Justice Issues
• Do those that benefit from the products have an
  obligation
• to those who object to the products?
• How is justice achieved while balancing the
  various interests?

42
Can Justice For All Competing Interests Be
Achieved?
Opponents and Proponents

• Justice For Biotech Opponents
• Should labeling be a requirement?
•  
• Justice For New Biotech Companies
• Is the market saturation of large biotech
  companies making it
• difficult for others to enter and succeed in
  the business?

43
Other Biotech Justice Concerns
Countries and Farmers

• Justice For Countries With Food Shortages
• Should biotech opponents be able to deny
  countries with
• severe food shortages the opportunity to
  become
• self-sufficient or even exporters?
•  
• Justice For Subsistence Farmers
• How will subsistence farmers who cannot afford
• the new technology be compensated?