The release of genetically modified crops into the environment: Part I. Overview of current status and regulations

Plant Journal

Volumn 33, Issue 1, 2003, Pages 1-18

  Nap, Jan Peter ^a   Metz, Peter L J ^b   Escaler, Marga ^c   Conner, Anthony J ^d  

^a WAGENINGEN UNIVERSITY   (Netherlands)

^b Seminis   (United States)

^c INTERNATIONAL RICE RESEARCH INSTITUTE   (Philippines)

^d THE NEW ZEALAND INSTITUTE FOR PLANT AND FOOD RESEARCH LIMITED   (New Zealand)

Author keywords

Agricultural biotechnology; GM crop regulation; Plant breeding; Precautionary principle; Risk assessment

Indexed keywords

AGRICULTURE; ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT; GENES;

GENETICALLY MODIFIED CROPS; TRADITIONAL BREEDING;

CROPS;

BIOTECHNOLOGY; CROPS, AGRICULTURAL; DEVELOPING COUNTRIES; ENVIRONMENT; PLANTS, GENETICALLY MODIFIED; RISK ASSESSMENT;

EID: 0037241293     PISSN: 09607412     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1046/j.0960-7412.2003.01602.x     Document Type: Review

References (65)

1. Artunduaga-Salas, R. (2000) Biosafety regulations on transgenic plants in Latin America and the Caribbean. The Andean countries as a model. In Proceedings of the Sixth International Symposium on the Biosafety of Genetically Modified Organisms (Fairbairn, C., Scoles, G. and McHughen, A., eds). Saskatoon, Canada: University Extension Press, pp. 21-25 (http://www.ag.usask.ca/isbr/Symposium/Proceedings/Section2.html#21).
2. Benbrook, C.M. (2001) When Does It Pay to Plant Bt Corn? Farm-Level Economic Impacts of Bt Corn, 1996-2001. Minneapolis, USA: Institute for Agriculture and Trade Policy (IATP), p. 4 (http://www.gefoodalert.org/library/admin/uploadedfiles/WhenDoes_It_Pay_to_ Plant_Bt_Corn_Farm-Level_Ec.pdf).
3. Biosafety Meeting (1999) Proceedings of the fifth Central and Eastern European Conference for Regional and International Co-operation on Safety in Biotechnology, December 12-14, Sofia, Bulgaria (http://www.vanolstweb.nl/cee/attachments/Sofia%201999%20summary%20report. doc).
4. Blume, Y.B. (2000) Key issues for Ukrainian acceptance of genetically modified plants and a comparison with other Central and Eastern European Countries. In Proceedings of the Sixth International Symposium on the Biosafety of Genetically Modified Organisms (Fairbairn, C., Scoles, G. and McHughen, A., eds). Saskatoon, Canada: University Extension Press, pp. 15-20 (http://www.ag.usask.ca/isbr/Symposium/Proceedings/Section2.html#15).
5. Brown, J.K.M. (2001) Is too much risk assessment risky? Trends Biotechnol. 19, 124-125.
6. Bullock, D. and Nitsi, E.I. (2001) GMO adoption and private cost savings: GR soybeans and Bt corn. In Genetically Modified Organisms in Agriculture. Economics and Politics (Nelson, G.C., ed.). San Diego, CA: Academic Press, pp. 47-58.
7. Burachik, M. and Traynor, P.L. (2002) Analysis of a Nationat Biosafety System: Regulatory Policies and Procedures in Argentina. ISNAR Country Report 63. The Hague, the Netherlands: International Service for National Agricultural Research, p. 58 (ftp://ftp.cgiar.org/isnar/Publicat/cr63.pdf).
8. Byrne, P., Ward, S., Harrington, J. and Fuller, L. (2002) Transgenic Crops: an Introduction and Resource Guide. The regulatory process for transgenic crops in the US. Website Colorado State University, Colorado (http://www.colostate.edu/programs/life-sciences/TransgenicCrops/evaluation. html).
9. Campolina de Oliveira Soares, A. (2001) Campaign overview: for a GMO-free Brazil. In Proceedings of the Flipside of Genetic Engineering; Genetic Engineering - Opinions from the South, 29 October 2001. The Hague, the Netherlands: various organisations (http://www.gentechdebat.nl/news/shownews.asp?itemid=99).
10. CAST (Council for Agricultural Science and Technology) (2000) Ecological Impact Assessment. Science Source for Food, Agricultural, and Environmental Issues. Ames, IA, USA: CAST (http://www.cast-science.org/biotechnology/20001011.htm).
11. CAST (Council for Agricultural Science and Technology) (2001) Evaluation of the US Regulatory Process for Crops Developed Through Biotechnology. Issue Paper 19. Ames, IA, USA: CAST (http://www.cast-science.org/pubs/cropregulation.pdf).
12. CEC (Commission of the European Communities) (2000) Communication from the Commission on the Precautionary Principle. Brussels, Belgium: CEC, p. 29 (http://europa.eu.int/comm/dgs/health_consumer/library/pub/pub07_en.pdf).
13. CEC (Commission of the European Communities) (2001a) Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council concerning the traceability and labelling of genetically modified organisms and traceability of food and feed products produced from genetically modified organisms and amending Directive 2001/18/EC. Brussels, Belgium: CEC (COM 2001, 182 final; 2001/0180 (COD)), p. 27 (http://europa.eu.int/comm/food/fs/gmo/biotech09_en.pdf).
14. CEC (Commission of the European Communities) (2001b) Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on genetically modified food and feed. Brussels, Belgium: CEC (COM 2001, 425 final; 2001/0173 (COD)), p. 64 (http://europa. eu.int/comm/food/fs/gmo/biotech08_en.pdf).
15. CFIA (Canadian Food Inspection Agency) (1998) Canada-US Bilateral on Agricultural Biotechnology. Appendix I: Molecular genetic characterisation data (http://www.inspection.gc.ca/english/plaveg/pbo/usda/usda03e.shtml).
16. Chen, Z., Gu, H., Li, Y., Tian, J. and Ou, L.-J. (2000) Prospects for and safety issues with transgenic food. In Proceedings of the Sixth International Symposium on the Biosafety of Genetically Modified Organisms (Fairbairn, C., Scoles, G. and McHughen, A., eds). Saskatoon, Canada: University Extension Press, pp. 4-5 (http://www.ag.usask.ca/isbr/Symposium/Proceedings/Section2. html#4).
17. Cohen, J.I. (ed.) (1999) Managing Agricultural Biotechnology. Addressing Research Programme Needs and Policy Implications. Oxford, UK/The Hague, the Netherlands: CABI Publishing.
18. Conner, A.J., Glare, T.R. and Nap, J.P. (2003) The release of genetically modified crops into the environment. II. Overview of ecological risk assessment. Plant J. 33, 19-46.
19. Dawkins, K. (2002) Gene Wars: the Politics of Biotechnology, 2nd edn. New York, USA: Seven Stories Press.
20. Deegan, D. (2001) Plant-incorporated protectant rules affirmed by administration: comments invited on supplemental notice and report. US EPA-CEMR, p. 2 (http://www.epa.gov/scipoly/press-release.pdf).
21. Ding, Y. (1995) Biosafety in China. In Proceedings of the third International Symposium on the Biosafety Results of Field Tests of Genetically Modified Plants and Micro-organisms (Jones, D.D., ed.). Oakland, CA: University of California, pp. 69-71.
22. Dorey, E. (2000) Taco dispute underscores need for standardized tests. Nature Biotechnol. 18, 1136-1137.
23. Eichelbaum, T., Allan, J., Fleming, J. and Randerson, R. (2001) Report of the Royal Commission on Genetic Modification. Wellington, New Zealand: Royal Commission on Genetic Modification (http://www.gmcommission.govt.nz/RCGM/index.html).
24. Falck-Zepeda, J.B., Traxler, G. and Nelson, R.G. (2001) Cotton GMO adoption and private profitability. In Genefically Modified Organisms in Agriculture. Economics and Politics. (Nelson, G.C., ed.). San Diego, CA, USA: Academic Press, pp. 47-58.
25. FDA (Food and Drug Agency) (1992) Statement of policy: foods derived from new plant varieties: notice. Federal Register, 57, 22984-23005 (http://www.cfsan.fda.gov/~lrd/bio1992.html).
26. Gewin, V. (2002) Academy proposes tighter crop monitoring. Nature, 415, 948.
27. Greenpeace International (2001) The Lost Markets of Genetic Engineering. Digest 'Genetically Engineered Food', p. 5 (http://www.greenpeace.org/~geneng/reports/food/lostmarkets2.htm).
28. Greenpeace International (2002) GE crops - increasingly isolated as awareness and rejection grow. Background information 'international genetically engineering campaign', p. 6 (http://www.greenpeace.org/~geneng/highlights/gmo/usda_mar28.pdf).
29. Huang, J., Rozelle, S., Pray, C. and Wang, Q. (2002) Plant biotechnology in China. Science, 295, 674-677.
30. Huang, J., Wang, Q., Zhang, Y.D., Zepeda, J.F. (2001) Agricultural Biotechnology Indicators: China. Working Paper, Centre for Chinese Agricultural Policy, Chinese Academy of Sciences. Supplementary material (Supplement D) to Huang et al. (2002) (http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/data/295/5555/674/DC1/4).
31. Huarte, M. (2000) Argentina. In Developing Country Profiles. Proceedings of the International Workshop on Transgenic Potatoes for the Benefit of Resource-Poor Farmers in Developing Countries, Manchester, UK, 5-9 June, 2000 (Uzárraga, L. and Hollister, A., eds). Lima, Peru: International Potato Center (CIP), pp. 9-13 (http://www.bangor.ac.uk/psp/pot_nov00/country/argentina.htm).
32. Jaffé, W.R. (ed.) (1994) Armonizacion de la bioseguridad en el Cono Sur: supervisión de Plantas Transgénicas, Marzo, Costa Rica: IICA.
33. James, C. (2001) Global Review of Commercialised Transgenic Crops: 2001. ISAAA Briefs no. 24: Preview. Ithaca, NY: International Service for the Acquisition of Agri-Biotech Applications (http://www.isaaa.org/publications/briefs/Brief_24.htm).
34. James, C. (2002) World-wide deployment of GM crops: aims and results - state of the art. In Discourse on Genetically Modified Plants. Bad Neuenahr, Germany: Bundesministerium für Verbraucherschutz, Ernährung und Landwirtschaft, April 19 (http://www.gruenegentechnik.de/Doku_Fachtagung/james_engl.pdf).
35. Josling, T. and Nelson, G.C. (2001) Looking into the future. In Genetically Modified Organisms in Agriculture. Economics and Politics. (Nelson, G.C., ed.). San Diego, CA: Academic Press, pp. 143-148.
36. Kandawa-Schulz, M. (2000) Biosafety regulations, releases and research activities in selected African countries. In Proceedings of the Sixth International Symposium on the Biosafety of Genetically Modified Organisms (Fairbairn, C., Scoles, G. and McHughen, A., eds). Saskatoon, Canada: University Extension Press, pp. 6-14 (http://www.ag.usask.ca/isbr/Symposium/Proceedings/Section2.html#6).
37. Kuiper, H.A., Kleter, G.A., Noteborn, H.P.J.M. and Kok, E.J. (2001) Assessment of the food safety issues related to genetically modified foods. Plant J. 27, 503-528.
38. La Rosa, J, (2000) Cuba. In Developing Country Profiles. Proceedings of the International Workshop on Transgenic Potatoes for the Benefit of Resource-Poor Farmers in Devetoping Countries, Manchester, UK, 5-9 June, 2000 (Lizárraga, L. and Hollister, A., eds). Lima, Peru: International Potato Center (CIP), pp. 26-28 (http://www.bangor.ac.uk/psp/pot_nov00/country/cuba.htm).
39. MacKenzie, D. (2000) International Comparison of Regutatory Frameworks for Food Products of Biotechnotogy. Ottawa, Canada: Canadian Biotechnology Advisory Committee, p. 62 (http://www.cbac-cccb.ca/documents/en/InternatComparisons_MacKenzie.pdf).
40. Madkour, M.A., El Nawawy, A.S. and Traynor, P.L. (2000) Analysis of a national biosafety system: regulatory policies and procedures in Egypt. ISNAR Country Report 62. The Hague, the Netherlands: International Service for National Agricultural Research, p. 41 (ftp://ftp.cgiar.org/isnar/Publicat/cr62.pdf).
41. MATRA (2002) Implementation of national biosafety frameworks in pre-accession countries of Central and Eastern Europe (http://www.biosafety-cee.org).
42. McLean, M.A., Frederick, R.J., Traynor, P.L., Cohen, J.I. and Komen, J. (2002) A Conceptual Framework for Implementing Biosafety: Linking Policy, Capacity, and Regulation. Briefing Paper 47. the Hague, the Netherlands: International Service for National Agricultural Research, p. 11 (ftp://ftp.cgiar.org/isnar/publicat/bp-47.pdf).
43. Moeller, D.R. (2001) GMO Liability Threats for Farmers. Legal Issues Surrounding the Planting of Genetically Modified Crops. Mineapolis, USA: Institute for Agriculture and Trade Policy (IATP), p. 8 (http://www.gefoodalert.org/library/admin/uploadedfiles/GMO_Liability_ Threats_for_Farmers_PDF_Ver.pdf).
44. Mushita, A.T. (2001) An African view on genetic engineering. In Proceedings the Flipside of Genetic Engineering; Genetic Engineering - Opinions from the South. The Hague: various organisations, October 29 (http://www.gentechdebat.nl/news/shownews.asp?itemid=96&returl= /conferentie/Default.asp?).
45. NAS (National Academy of Sciences) (2000) Genetically Modified Pest-Protected Plants: Science and Regulation. Washington, DC: National Academy Press (http://www.nap.edu/books/0309069300/html/).
46. NAS (National Academy of Sciences) (2002) Environmental Effects of Transgenic Plants: the Scope and Adequacy of Regulation. Washington, DC: National Academy Press (http://books.nap.edu/books/0309082633/html/index.html).
47. NASS (National Agricultural Statistics Service) (2002) Prospective Plantings. Match 2002 (http://usda.mannlib.cornell.edu/reports/nassr/field/pcp-bbp/pspl0302.pdf).
48. Nelson, G.C. (ed.) (2001) Genetically Modified Organisms in Agriculture. Economics and Politics. San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
49. Nelson, G.C., Babinard, J. and Josling, T. (2001) The domestic and regional regulatory environment. In Genetically Modified Organisms in Agriculture. Economics and Politics. (Nelson, G.C., ed.). San Diego, CA: Academic Press, pp. 97-116.
50. NRC (National Research Council) (1989) Field Testing Genetically Modified Organisms: Framework for Decisions. Washington, DC: National Academy Press (http://books.nap.edu/books/0309040760/html/index.html).
51. OECD (Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development) (1993a) Safety Considerations for Biotechnology: Scale-Up of Crop Plants. Paris, France: OECD (http://www.oecd.org/pdf/M00022000/M00022009.pdf).
52. OECD (Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development) (1993b) Safety Considerations of Foods Derived by Modern Biotechnology: Concepts and Principles. Paris, France: OECD (http://www.oecd.org/pdf/M00007000/M00007573.pdf).
53. OGTR (Office of the Gene Technology Regulator) (2002) Publications and forms (http://www.health.gov.au/ogtr/publications/index.htm).
54. PABE (2001) Public Perceptions of Agricultural Biotechnologies in Europe. Final report of the PABE research project, Lancaster, UK: Lancaster University, p. 113 (http://www.lancs.ac.uk/depts/ieppp/pabe/docs/pabe_finalreport.pdf).
55. PBO (Plant Biosafety Office) (2002) Decision Documents. Determination of Environmental and Livestock Feed Safety (http://www.inspection.gc.ca/english/plaveg/pbo/dde.shtml).
56. Persley, G.J., Giddings, L.V. and Juma, C. (1993) Biosafety: the Safe Application of Biotechnology in Agriculture and the Environment. Research Report no. 5. The Hague, the Netherlands: International Service for National Agricultural Research p. 46 (ftp://ftp.cgiar.org/isnar/Publicat/PDF/RR-05.pdf).
57. Redenbaugh, K., Hiatt, M., Martineau, B., Kramer, M., Sheehy, R., Sanders, R., Houck, C. and Emlay, D. (1992) Safety Assessment of Genetically Engineered Fruits and Vegetables; a Case Study of the FLAVR SAVR™ Tomato. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press.
58. RNS (Reuter News service) (2002) FACTBOX - Japan's new rules for biotech crop imports (http://www.planetark.org/dailynews-story.cfm?newsid=10300).
59. Russell, B. (1951) A liberal decalogue. In New York Times Magazine, 16 December 1951, p. 42 (as reprinted in the Autobiography of Bertrand Russell, 3: 1944-69, pp. 71-72).
60. SCBD (Secretariat of the Convention on Biological Diversity) (2000) Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety to the Convention on Biological Diversity: Text and Annexes. Montreal: Secretariat of the Convention on Biological Diversity (http://www.biodiv.org/doc/legal/cartagena-protocol-en.pdf).
61. Schuhmacher, K.D. (2002) The importance of genetically modified products in the trade of agricultural goods and foodstuffs. In Dokumentation Diskurs Grüne Gentechnik. Berlin, Germany: Bundesministerium für Verbraucherschutz, Ernährung und Landwirtschaft (in German) (http://www.gruenegentechnik.de/Doku_Anh290102/Schuhmacher_vortr.pdf).
62. STAFF (Society for Techno-Innovation Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries) (2002) System and procedures for the application of recombinant DNA crop plants in agriculture, forestry, fisheries and the food industry. In Introduction to Japanese Government Guidelines Regarding Recombinant DNA Crop Plants. Tokyo: STAFF (http://www.s.affrc.go.jp/docs/sentan/eintro/intro.htm).
63. UNEP (United Nations Environment Programme) (1995) UNEP International Technical Guidelines for Safety in Biotechnology (http://www.unep.org/unep/program/natres/biodiv/irb/unepgds.htm).
64. UNEP (United Nations Environment Programme) (2002) UNEPGEF Project on development of national biosafety frameworks (http://www.unep.ch/biosafety/).
65. Zhou, R.H., Zhang, Z.C., Wu, Q., Fang, R.X., Mang, K.Q., Tian, Y.C. and Wang, G.L. (1995) Large-scale performance of transgenic tobacco plants resistant to both tobacco mosaic virus and cucumber mosaic virus. In Proceedings of the third International Symposium on the Biosafety Results of Field Tests of Genetically Modified Plants and Micro-Organisms (Jones, D.D., ed.). Oakland, CA: University of California, pp. 49-55.