Study calls for genetic engineering policy overhaul

Legislation regulating the use of new genomic techniques in the EU is not keeping pace with scientific and technological development, causing implementation challenges and legal uncertainties.

This was according to a recently released study commissioned by the Council of the European Union.

In addition, the study highlighted an unjustifiable discrepancy between the different levels of regulatory oversight applied to products with similar levels of risk, as was the case for conventionally bred plants and those obtained from certain new genomic techniques.

Dr Hennie Groenewald, CEO of Biosafety South Africa, explained that both South Africa and the EU’s definitions of genetically engineered (GE) crops were rooted in developments during the 1990s, when genetically modified (GM) crops were first introduced to the market.

“Genetic modification is basically defined as the cross-species movement of genes that won’t develop under normal conditions, whereas new genetic engineering techniques have since evolved to induce genetic changes in a specific species to accelerate an outcome that might also occur under natural conditions.

“Unlike [GM] crops, these crops present the same risks as any other conventionally bred cultivar, with the risks minimised through conventional evaluations before the new cultivars or varieties are released commercially.”

The study also hinted at a change of heart in the EU’s stance against GM crops, by acknowledging that new genomic techniques may contribute to sustainable agri-food systems in line with the objectives of the European Green Deal and Farm to Fork strategy.

Nevertheless, it could still be a while before regulations were adjusted to become more GE-friendly, as the report first needed to be circulated for comment to the various EU member countries.

In addition, the report acknowledged that future policy action would need to address public knowledge gaps and limitations.

“A couple of EU countries, such as Spain and Portugal, produce GM maize, and GM imports are also allowed into the EU. However, while the science has proven the advantages and safety of these crops, uptake has historically been low in EU countries due to the strong anti-GM lobby groups and perceptions [of GM crops],” Groenewald said.

He added that it was still uncertain how a change in policy might affect trade between South Africa and the EU: “On the one hand, it might make it easier for South Africa to export some types of GM crops to the [EU], while on the other, it might result in increased competition from other regions, which may then also produce such crops without fear of possible technical trade barriers.”

The use of GE crops has greatly benefitted the South African grain industry. According to Wandile Sihlobo, chief economist at Agbiz, the technology was allowing South Africa to produce roughly 20% of sub-Saharan Africa’s maize, utilising a relatively small area of an average of 2,5 million hectares since 2010.

In fact, in the 2019/2020 production season, South Africa produced 19% of the region’s overall maize output of 79 million tons, whereas Nigeria planted

6,5 million hectares, but only harvested 11,7 million tons of maize, according to the International Grains Council.

South Africa began planting GE maize seeds in 1998, and widely from the 2001/2002 season. Before the introduction of GE maize seeds, average maize yields were around 2,4t/ha, and that has now increased to an average of 5,9t/ha as of the 2019/2020 production season.

Meanwhile, the sub-Saharan African region’s maize yields remain negligible, averaging below 2t/ha, Sihlobo said. – Glenneis Kriel

THE USE OF GENETICALLY ENGINEERED CROPS HAS BEEN OF GREAT BENEFIT TO SOUTH AFRICA’S GRAIN SECTOR