Creative and flexible solutions are required to increase agricultural productivity in ways that ensure access by all people to the food they need without damaging the environment or depleting natural resources for future generations. Sustainable agriculture is a framework of principles which can be applied to produce sufficient affordable food and fibre in a manner that is environmentally responsible, economically viable and socially acceptable.

What is Integrated Pest Management?

There are many definitions of Integrated Pest Management (IPM). CropLife International supports IPM as defined by the FAO’s International Code of Conduct on the distribution and use of pesticides (2002):

“Integrated Pest Management (IPM) means the careful consideration of all available pest control techniques and subsequent integration of appropriate measures that discourage the development of pest populations and keep pesticides and other interventions to levels that are economically justified and reduce or minimise risks to human health and the environment. IPM emphasises the growth of a healthy crop with the least possible disruption to agroecosystems and encourages natural pest control mechanisms.”

Pest damage must obviously be controlled if yield, quality, food safety and profit are to be maintained. Integrated Pest Management (IPM) is a flexible and thoughtful approach that uses the minimum intervention to achieve control. For example, crop rotation can reduce insects and disease organisms reaching a field. Beneficial insects can provide natural or "biological" control of some pests . Selective pesticides and pest-resistant plant varieties are compatible with these methods, contributing to a fully integrated crop management programme.

What is Integrated Crop Management?

Integrated Crop Management (ICM) is a whole-farm strategy that involves managing crops profitably in ways that suit local soil, climatic and environmental conditions, while minimising avoidable environmental impact.

ICM is not prescriptive because it is a dynamic concept: it must have the flexibility to be relevant to any farm, in any country, and it must always be receptive to change and technological advances. It uses the latest research, technology, experience and traditional knowledge in ways that suit local conditions in order to optimise food production, enhance energy conservation and minimise environmental impacts.

^ Top

Agricultural biotechnology

What is plant biotechnology?

Biotechnology is defined by the Convention on Biological Diversity as "any technological application that uses biological systems, living organisms, or derivatives thereof, to make or modify products or processes for specific use."

More broadly, biotechnology covers biological processing, and can include anything from soya sauce production to manufacture of ethanol as motor fuel. To the layman, plant biotechnology has become synonymous with genetic modification (GM), but actually covers a much wider range of techniques including, for example, marker-assisted breeding. Nevertheless, for all practical purposes, plant biotechnology now refers only to the modification of plant DNA, the genetic material of living organisms, to enhance their tolerance to pests and diseases, increase yield, and/or improve quality and nutritional value.

The process by which this is carried out is more properly called recombinant-DNA (r-DNA) technology, and the products are GM seeds or crops or, more generally, genetically modified organisms (GMOs). Modern molecular biology techniques are used to isolate, alter and transfer genes from one organism to another.

In plant biotechnology, genetic engineering allows for the movement of specific and well defined genes within or between plant species, and also to incorporate genes originally found in bacteria or animals. This extends the scope of plant breeding very significantly. Such plants are said to be transgenic.

Biotechnology increases efficiency in developing new varieties of plants, taking years away from the lengthy, trial-and-error traditional breeding process. Nevertheless, the approval process takes much longer and is far more expensive than for conventional varieties, so genetic modification is only used in cases where the same result cannot be obtained via conventional breeding.

Why do we want to make transgenic crops?

The primary benefit of plant biotechnology using genes from other organisms is to increase the amount of genetic variability available for breeders to use. Modern crop varieties generally draw from a rather narrow genetic base, having been bred over many centuries so that they bear little resemblance to their original wild ancestors.

The goal is to allow plant breeders to produce more useful and productive crop varieties by exploiting genes from a wide range of living sources, not just those that can be found within the crop species itself. Progress in traditional plant breeding is limited by the genetic diversity within each crop species, the diversity sometimes available from closely related species, or occasionally useful diversity created within the crop itself by inducing mutations. Often, genes for traits that could be of benefit are not found in a particular crop species, so the ability to make plants with new, desirable traits borrowed from other species represents a major technological advance over conventional breeding methods. Two examples are:

Roundup Ready® crops, which are tolerant to the herbicide glyphosate (Monsanto brand-name Roundup). These incorporate a gene discovered in a bacterium and not normally present in plants.
“Golden” rice: rice producing vitamin A in its granules, so avoiding vitamin deficiency when rice is used a staple food in developing countries. This uses one gene isolated from daffodils and another one from a bacterium.

What are novel foods?

"Novel foods are foods that have previously not been available for sale, have been substantially modified from traditional composition, or are produced by a novel food process, including genetically engineered food products." This includes, for example, fruit and vegetables imported for the first time into a region where they have never formed part of the diet.

All novel foods must be assessed for safety to humans, animals and the environment before receiving regulatory approval. As part of the scientific assessment, the principal of "substantial equivalence" is applied. This refers to comparing the novel product to its conventional counterpart. Substantial equivalence helps to determine what characteristics of a novel food must be examined in more detail.

All novel foods approved to date have conventional counterparts. Only novel products that are judged to be as safe as their conventional counterparts are approved for use.

Is the nutritional value of GMO foods different?

It depends on the reason for making the modification. Herbicide-tolerant or insect-resistant crops, for example, which form the vast majority of GM crops currently grown are, to all intents and purposes, identical to their non-GM counterparts. However, biotechnology can alter the nutritional composition of foods in a dramatic and very positive way. For example there are genetically enhanced rice strains with a high Vitamin A content (“golden rice”), or tomatoes with high levels of lycopene, both still in development. Other groups are working on biotech routes to produce rice and soya with reduced potential to cause allergies.

Do GMO foods look or taste different?

With few exceptions, GMO products look and taste the same as their conventional counterparts. One example of a GMO product being researched that looks different is "golden rice." This rice has a distinctive orange colour due to the increased level of Vitamin A brought about by genetic engineering.

Many leading scientists are warning us about the dangers of GMO foods. How can they be wrong?

There are a few, very vocal scientists who oppose genetically modified foods. An overwhelming majority of scientists with expertise in the areas of molecular biology and biotechnology have no concerns about the use of genetic modification in principle. However, like any tool, biotechnology can be used well or badly. The stringent approvals procedures in place round the world, which look at each individual case, are there precisely to ensure that any potentially risky applications never become commercialised. Debate and disagreement among scientists is not new. Leading edge science tends to be controversial and can generate mixed opinions among the experts.

The technology is so new. How can we know it is safe?

Biotechnology has been used for thousands of years to produce improved food and healthcare products. Today, modern biotechnology allows us to develop products more safely and rapidly than ever before through a new process called genetic modification, which allows the selection and insertion of individual genes into plant cells. This speeds up the process of breeding desirable traits into plants.

Current science shows that foods made from biotechnology are safe to consume and safe for the environment. The scientific consensus is that the risks associated with food biotechnology products are fundamentally the same as for other foods. GM crops have now been commercially grown for ten years, and were grown on over 80 million hectares of land round the world in 2005. There were many years of research, development and evaluation before any GM seed was planted commercially, and we know far more about these crop varieties than about any others emerging from conventional breeding.

However, a technology is essentially neutral: it is how it is applied which is important. That is why every new development is assessed separately, on a case-by-case basis.

Science has failed in the past. How do we know the science is sound with biotechnology?

No system is ever perfect and life is not without risk. The challenge is to ensure that the regulatory system is rigorous enough to minimise any risk and to capitalise on benefits. For every failure you can think of, there are thousands of products approved every year that safely improve the quality of life: failures we tend to notice, successes we take for granted.

There is so much conflicting information about this issue. Where can I get unbiased information?

For unbiased information about biotechnology and genetic engineering related to food, you can take a look at the following links:

World Health Organisation – http://www.who.int/fsf
Agbios safety database: http://www.agbios.com/dbase.php
The UK Food and Drinks Federation’s foodfuture initiative: http://www.foodfuture.org.uk/
DNA from the beginning: http://www.dnaftb.org/dnaftb/
European Commission (DG Research) project on GM safety: http://europa.eu.int/comm/research/quality-of-life/gmo/general-intro.html#top
US National Center for Food and Agricultural Policy: http://www.ncfap.org/
The Pew initiative on Food and Biotechnology: http://pewagbiotech.org/
GMO Compass (European Commission-funded): http://www.gmo-compass.org/eng/home/#
OECD: http://www.oecd.org/topic/0,2686,en_2649_37437_1_1_1_1_37437,00.html

What are some of the benefits of genetically modified foods?

The benefits biotechnology can deliver are many. Most of the examples below have been shown to work but are not yet commercial.

For Consumers:

fruits, vegetables and cereals that are more nutritious, taste better and keep longer.
processed foods that are healthier. For example, lower saturated fats in soybeans and in canola oil.
foods that help us fight disease better .
more dependable crop yields, which ultimately has an effect on the price paid at the grocery store. long-term research is looking at increased tolerance for drought, flood, heat, cold, salt or metals in the soil.
nutraceuticals - foods that can deliver vaccines and medicines.

For Farmers:

crops resistant to disease.
crops that protect themselves from pests.
crops that make it easier for farmers to control weeds.
crops that require less preparation of the soil, meaning less erosion
more flexible crop management and more consistent yields.

Is it true that 70 per cent of our foods are genetically modified?

No, the fact is that 70 per cent of processed foods (in countries such as the USA where GM ingredients are widely used in the food chain) may contain ingredients from genetically modified crops such as canola, soybean or corn.

Why are genetically modified foods banned in Europe?

GM foods are not banned in Europe. A number of GM crops have been authorised for both food and animal feed use, and millions of tonnes of GM soy are imported annually as animal feed. However, most food manufacturers have formulated GM ingredients out of their products because of the negative publicity surrounding the initial import of GM soy.

The exception is for processing aids such as enzymes. EU law does not require these to be labelled, whatever their source, and GM-derived enzymes are in common use to process foods. For example, the majority of hard cheese in Europe is produced using transgenic chymosin, the milk-clotting enzyme which also occurs in rennet.

Insect resistant GM maize has also been grown in northern Spain for a number of years without any problem: on nearly 60,000 hectares in 2005. The success of this has led a number of farmers in southern France to follow suit, although official statistics do not exist for the area grown.

Although there was a de facto moratorium in place until comparatively recently, while a few regulatory issues were addressed to the satisfaction of all Member States, a number of new GM crops have recently received approval for import and use in the food chain.

Because of the experience of Mad Cow disease, the dioxin scare and other similar incidents, European consumers do not have the same faith in their regulatory systems as in other countries, and are generally more suspicious of both science and authority figures. In addition, environmental NGOs are more influential than in the USA. This overall context created a situation where major retailers as a group found it simpler to reformulate products than to risk losing competitiveness.

Which countries accept GMO exports? Which countries don't? Why?

The U.S., Japan, China and Mexico, Thailand, Argentina, and Chile are purchasing products derived from transgenic crops. India and Korea also import some canola products. Approximately 98% of genetically modified corn produced in Canada has been approved for sale in Europe. All soybean varieties, including herbicide tolerant, have been approved for export to Europe and other trading partners.

What is being done to address the long-term impacts of genetically modified foods?

Research on genetically modified foods and crops is ongoing and each year, the mountain of scientific data that illustrates the technology is sound and safe continues to grow. Research knowledge and familiarity with this technology is based on thousands of experiments and tests that extend over more than 25 years. It must also be recognised that commercial release of these varieties was preceded by many years of laboratory and field trials. Over the last 15 years, tens of thousands of field tests have been conducted on more than 30 crops around the world.

Current science shows that genetically modified foods now approved are as safe to consume as their conventional counterparts. While there is no such thing as "zero risk" for any food, consumers can be confident that foods produced using biotechnology meet the most stringent food safety standards. There is absolutely no sound reason to suppose that currently approved food crops will have any long term negative impacts, either on consumers or the environment.

How are GMO products researched and developed?

Many major plant science companies believe in the future benefits of biotechnology and invest millions of dollars in research every year. It can take 10-15 years and millions of dollars to develop a product and bring it to market.

The private sector is particularly active in this area, as the early development of r-DNA technology coincided to a large degree with the withdrawal of the public sector from plant breeding. Nevertheless, public sector breeding is still important, particularly for the developing world, and the R&D process is the same wherever the work is done.

Dedicated scientists spend years developing products. Plants are first modified in laboratories, then growth chambers or greenhouses. The next step in the development process is to test them in the field where they are isolated from other crops to minimise any possible environmental impact. While GM crops have now been on the market for ten years, it must be recognized that commercial release has also been preceded by many years of laboratory and field trials.

Who decides if a biotechnology product is safe? Who does the testing?

Genetically modified (GM) food, food additives, and processing aids are subject to comprehensive safety tests before they can enter the marketplace. The same applies to animal feeds made using genetically modified crops. Applicants for a marketing licence are obliged to show, on the basis of tests that have been conducted, that the products in question do not entail any risk for humans, animals, or the environment. Official approval is given only after an exhaustive scientific appraisal of safety-related issues has been made.

In the EU, objective scientific advice is given by independent experts. However, approval is on the basis of voting by Member States, some of whom vote on political lines rather than on the basis of scientific advice and evidence.

Is there multilateral regulation of GMO Products?

Several respected international bodies have developed standards for GM products.

Organisations such as the Food and Agriculture Organisation (FAO), the World Health Organisation (WHO) and the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) are helping to define a multilateral regulatory environment for the products of biotechnology.

The Codex Alimentarius Commission was established in 1962 to administer the Joint FAO/WHO Food Standards Programme. The WTO recognises Codex Alimentarius Commission standards as the international standards of reference for food. Unfortunately, at present, there is no mutual recognition or sharing of data between different regulatory authorities.

In Montreal on January 29, 2000, 138 countries signed the new Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety, ending five years of negotiations under the United Nations Convention on Biological Diversity. This global treaty, which came into force in September 2003, refers to the shipment of genetically modified commodities across borders.

The agreement provides a framework for international science-based rules and procedures. These will be further developed as governments and companies determine how to implement the Protocol in the coming years. The Protocol builds on the base of domestic regulations that already exists in more than 60 nations.

Why aren't genetically modified foods labelled in America?

In the US, genetically modified foods are treated exactly the same as other new foods seeking entrance to the marketplace. Whenever a product raises a health or safety issue, such as allergenicity or a change in nutritional value, it must be labelled.

What is the status of labelling GMOs in other countries?

Labelling requirements vary by country. In the EU, process-based labelling is required: any ingredient or product containing more than 0.9% GM material, or being derived from a GM source, must be labelled. This means, for example, that oil from GM soya would have to be labelled as such even though it contained no detectable transgenic DNA or protein and was analytically indistinguishable from a conventional equivalent.

Japan has developed mandatory labelling. Their guidelines are based on science and a realistic approach to labelling. Korea, Thailand and Hong Kong are also considering mandatory labelling.

Why can't genetically modified crops just be segregated and labelled?

Segregation of crops is the process of completely separating GMO from non-GMO crops. Segregation is possible and tests do exist that identify whether crops and ingredients have been genetically altered. However, there are some limitations on what they can test for, commercial availability, and cost effectiveness.

Grain segregation, for instance, is possible only if the producer carefully harvests, stores and transports GMO grain separately from non-GMO grain. It may be extremely difficult for the farmer to properly clean all storage and transport units to ensure a totally pure end product. To change grain handling and food processing systems to segregate all GMOs from non-GMOs would be a cumbersome and costly process. The decision whether or not to proceed down this path therefore requires careful consideration.

It is not often recognised that all agricultural commodities are impure to some extent: several percent of various impurities are tolerated quite legally in anything from cereal grains to olive oil. However, the tolerance in the case of GMOs has been set much lower: 0.9% in the EU, for example.

Aren't we putting the environment at risk by releasing GMOs into it?

Current science shows that biotech varieties authorised for commercial planting are safe for the environment. No-one can predict anything with 100% assurance, but the regulatory system that exists provides that every possible precaution is taken in assessing the safety of foods before they are made available to the consumer.

Plants with novel traits are regulated alongside similar products developed using traditional technologies, but generally much more stringently. For example, in most countries a herbicide-tolerant variety produced using biotechnology is subject to far more intense scrutiny than a conventionally bred variety with exactly the same trait. This is despite the fact that there is no reason to suppose a priori that the environmental impact would be any different.

Every GM-produced trait in a particular crop is examined for:

the potential for plants to spread and transfer genetic material to other species
possible harm to non-target species
the disruption of balance in natural ecosystems through the replacement of species, and
the loss of biodiversity (diversity of species, variation of characteristics).

Biotechnology is a key element in sustainable agriculture that will benefit the environment in the long-term.

What about the study that showed genetically modified corn kills Monarch butterflies?

In May 1999, Nature magazine published a letter from researchers at Cornell University that reported findings suggesting further research was needed into the effect of pollen from selected strains of Bt corn on the Monarch caterpillar. Since that publication, many university researchers, including others at Cornell, have stepped forward to stress that the Monarch study did not represent natural conditions. In practice, the planting of large areas of GM corn in the American Mid-West has had no effect on the population of Monarch butterflies, which have continued to fluctuate according to variations in other factors.

Extensive environmental research has confirmed the safety of Bt corn on non-target insects, such as the ladybird beetle, honeybee and the green lacewing, in the natural environment.

Aren't genetically modified foods more dangerous than non-GMO foods?

No, in fact, in the future specific GMO foods might even be safer for people with specific allergies then their non-GMO counterparts.

Foods from crops modified using biotechnology are evaluated for safety according to processes endorsed by the United Nations Food and Agriculture Organisation and the World Health Organisation. Far more is known about them in detail than any other foods we eat.

Is it safe to eat meat or poultry from animals that have been fed genetically modified grains?

Yes, research indicates animals fed GMO crops are no different than those fed conventional feeds. Proteins from GMO feeds have not been detected in milk, egg products or meat.

It is clear that allergens are transferred through genetic engineering. What about people with life-threatening food allergies?

Genetic modification is used to introduce individual genes with known properties into a plant so it is possible to precisely test the risk of allergic potential in connection with genetically modified food p