Successful co-existence for GM food crops in 5 steps, new research
opportunities of GM food crops but the debate still rattles on with
the focus now turned to the co-existence of GM, organic and
conventional crops with a new UK report claiming this is possible
through five key steps.
UK consultants PG Economics suggest in a new research paper that there are fundamental flaws in the in the argument that GM crops cannot 'co-exist' along side their organic and conventional equivalents.
"Co-existence is based on the premise that farmers should be free to cultivate the crops of their choice using the production system they prefer whether they are GM, conventional or organic. Despite claims from opponents, co-existence is not a crop safety issue but one that relates solely to the production and marketing of crops approved for use," said Graham Brookes, author of the report.
Co-existence and cross-contamination of conventional and organic crops by GM material has led to heated discussions at both national and European levels with environmental groups pushing for zero tolerance of the material in GM seeds. No decision has yet been made at a European level. Opponents to GM crops believe allowing GM seeds will lead to contamination of the food chain that will be difficult to control by farmers and food makers.
And setting the threshold of 'unavoidable' traces of GM seeds in other products - how much GM material may be tolerated without labelling in batches of conventional seed - is at the core of the ongoing discussions in Brussels.
"The Commission must take into account the reality that most European farmers, processors and retailers have to supply a non-GMO market," said Stefano Masini of Italy's Coldiretti, Europe's biggest farmer association, last month during talks in Brussels to tackle the threshold level.
A threshold above the detection limit will burden the production process with uncertainty, additional risks and costs. If creeping contamination becomes the rule, the production of non-GM food will become a costly and high-risk business, he added.
The research paper from PG Economics crystallises five key principles that can be adapted by farmers to local circumstances on a crop by crop basis - these are context, consistency, proportionality, equity (fairness) and practicality.
According to the report, on-farm experience in North America and Spain since 1995 has demonstrated that through the application of sensible farm level practices (e.g. the separation of crops by space and time, good communication with neighbours and the use of good husbandry practices) 'successful co-existence between GM and non GM crops has been possible, and without government involvement'.
Context determines the relative commercial and agronomic importance of different crop production systems based on planted area, production and economic value and for 'consistency' should be consistent in dealing with the adventitious presence of all unwanted material, including GM, organic and conventional, write the UK consultants.
Onto 'proportionality' the paper claims that all co-existence measures established should be proportionate, non discriminatory and science-based and significantly, 'equity' (fairness) being any economic liability provisions (that compensate non GM growers for adventitious presence of GM) should be equally applicable to GM growers for adventitious presence of non GM crops. 'No one sector should be able to veto another - access and choice works both ways,' claims the research paper.
Finally 'practicality' whereby all co-existence measures should be based on 'legal, practical and scientific realities'.
Earlier this year tough new labelling rules on GM foodstuffs opened the way for the European Union to end its five-year moratorium on the entry of new genetically modified food crops into the European market.
