November 29, 2004
Biotechnology
Australia
Gene Technology Information Service
Fact sheet 12
Potential genetic engineering
issues for rural producers
Biotechnology is a rapidly
emerging industry and has potential importance for Australia
because we rely on biological systems for much of our economy.
Advances in Australian biotechnology, including gene technology,
may help keep our country competitive and at the cutting edge of
agriculture, food processing, forestry and environmental
management. In 2003, producers worldwide planted genetically
modified (GM) seeds on more than 67 million hectares of
cultivated land. For comparison, this land area is equivalent to
nearly 9 per cent of Australia’s landmass.
Currently, Australia grows only GM
cotton and GM carnations commercially, although two GM canolas
have also been licensed for commercial growing. About 220,000
hectares are planted under GM cotton.
As with any new technology, we
must carefully consider gene technology issues so that any
associated risks are managed and benefits are maximised.
Those who consider using this new
technology need up-to-date information to make informed
decisions. Many factors can affect the decision to use gene
technology as part of primary production. The decision to grow a
GM crop may include considerations of the size and
aggressiveness of a pest population in an area, the local cost
of applying insecticide or herbicide, the cost of GM seed and
those suitable for a given area, expected profit margins, market
acceptance and the behaviour of competitors in other producing
or importing countries.
Potential benefits
Genetically modified crops have
the potential to offer many benefits to primary producers and
others, including:
-
higher
crop yields and quality, combined with competitive
production systems
-
faster
growth in plants and animals
-
improved
taste, textures and/or nutritional value for consumers
-
better
transportability and preservation of harvested produce
-
new food
products and ingredients
-
improved
resistance to animal and plant pests and diseases
-
better
plant tolerance of environmental extremes, such as drought
and salinity
-
plant
production of specialty chemicals
-
better
cotton fibre quality
-
improved
vaccines and diagnostic testing for animal diseases
The technology may add to the
productivity, quality and cost-effectiveness of crops and
livestock. New niche marketsmay emerge for products tailored for
specific uses.
Studies of some GM crops overseas
and GM cotton in Australia, show a significant reduction in
spraying of chemical insecticides. Some GM crops overseas,
though not all, also use less environmentally persistent
herbicides. Coupled with a potential drop in fertiliser use (if
GM plants can use existing soil nutrients more effectively), it
could lessen farming’s chemical impact on the environment and
human health.
Potential risks
However, there are concerns that
GM crops may:
-
contaminate other crops or plants through crosspollination
in some crops
-
require
farmers to use herbicide-tolerant crops and companion
herbicide(s) supplied by a single company
-
lead to
farmers using more chemicals and sprays on
herbicide-tolerant crops
-
have
unknown long-term effects on the environment, and humans and
animals that eat GM products
-
allow
target insects to develop resistance against pest-resistant
crops, and/or affect non-target insects
-
be toxic
to non-target organisms
-
be
unacceptable in some overseas markets
-
harm
Australian agriculture’s ‘clean, green’ image
-
increase
weediness or cause new weediness
GM technology’s potentially
harmful implications focus on possible unknown impacts on the
environment and
anticipated damage to our overseas market image.
Australian GM plant licences
and crops
Australia has licensed several GM
plants for commercial use (all of these licences were granted
only after a rigorous risk assessment process by the OGTR):
-
five
varieties of blue/purple carnations with extended vase life
(including FLORIGENE Moondust™ and
Moonshadow™).
-
three
varieties of GM cotton: insect-resistant cotton (INGARD®,
Bollgard® II), herbicide-tolerant cotton (Roundup
Ready®), and combined insect-resistant and
herbicide-tolerant cottons (INGARD®/Roundup Ready® and
Bollgard® II/Roundup Ready®).
-
two types
of GM herbicide-tolerant canola — Invigor® canola and
RoundUp Ready® canola. These are the most
recent GM crops to have been licensed for general release,
but they are not yet being grown commercially.
Implications for farming
practice
Under the Gene Technology Act
2000, the Gene Technology Regulator regulates certain dealings
with gene technology activities. OGTR regulations ensure that
potential hazards to individuals, the community and the
environment are identified and managed as required. The
regulations require the controlled conduct of gene technology
research in laboratories, and the controlled and safe release of
genetically modified organisms (GMOs) into the environment.
Approved GM crops or livestock
must be released under specific licensing conditions and adhere
to a risk management plan. That includes having a risk
management plan specially tailored for each GM product and
farmers’ circumstances. Farmers must adhere to all the
conditions in their plans or risk losing their licence to grow
the GM crop or animal. Among the conditions, they are required
to provide buffer zones and be open to inspection and monitoring
by OGTR representatives.
Storage and handling
implications
Some countries, such as the United
States and Canada, have chosen not to separate GM and non-GM
crops. However, as the majority of markets to date are demanding
this separation, Australian farmers want to be able to meet
these individual requirements in order to export their product.
To achieve this, it is likely GM
crops will need to be kept separate from non-GM crops not only
in farmers’ fields, but also during transport and bulk handling.
Australia has yet to decide on segregation procedures for GM
produce. Segregation costs and who will bear them (growers,
handlers, consumers) have also to be determined. The costs may
include buying new transport vehicles, containers and storage
facilities or rededicating equipment, if sales of GM varieties
surpass those of conventionally grown crops.
Implications for sale of GM
products
Despite claims that the arrival of
GM crops on world markets will increase the price of
conventionally grown crops as buyers seek to avoid GM material,
there is no evidence of such behaviour so far. Australian
economists have predicted that any resulting higher prices for
non-GM products are likely to form only a small part of the
world market.
When Canada started to grow GM
canola and sell a mixed product, it lost its sales to the
European Union, which prohibits GM imports. However, Canada soon
found replacement markets in other countries, such as Japan.
Many food manufacturers remain cautious about using GM
ingredients in their products because of consumer resistance.
Consumer support for GM products varies between countries and
can change over time, so it is difficult to predict what crops
will prove acceptable in the future. As manufacturers focus on
new products, such as functional foods and ‘nutriceuticals’,
consumers may accept clearly labelled food products with a GM
component, if they believe they will improve their health.
Some consumers are concerned about
conventional livestock that may graze on GM pastures, or are
given feed containing GM material. They believe this will make
the animal a GM product. This is scientifically untrue, but this
mistaken belief may affect consumer attitudes to some meat and
dairy products.
Some sectors are concerned that if
Australia markets GM products, it will affect our ‘clean, green’
image and, in
particular, harm sales of organic and conventional (non-GM)
products. Resolving this concern will depend on the efficiency
of segregation procedures at all stages — from ‘paddock to
plate’.
Legal implications
Because of the sensitivity over GM
crops and livestock, farmers need to consider several legal
implications:
-
non-adherence to OGTR licence conditions for GM products and
the associated risk management plan
-
potential
adverse effects on neighbouring properties or products, if
GM material moves into other crops or
livestock, and who assumes liability
-
contamination of harvested products through careless
transport or handling
Some people believe GMOs pose no
unique risks and argue that liability rules commonly used for
other agricultural undertakings should apply. They claim
existing legal actions of trespass, nuisance or negligence
should cover most concerns.
Others say agricultural
biotechnology is fundamentally different from other forms of
agricultural breeding technology. They argue the need for
special legal liability provisions to ensure adequate relief for
those who suffer loss due to the unintended presence of GM
material.
An initial scoping study for the
Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry concluded that
for the present,
monitoring alone is satisfactory. This is consistent with the
Primary Industries Ministerial Council’s approach for industry
self-regulation, with continued government monitoring. Applied
common law and existing legislation apply to GMOs and their
unintended presence.
Environmental implications
Some research shows growing GM
crops may benefit the environment by reducing the chemicals
sprayed to prevent weeds and insect damage and through the use
of less persistent chemicals. For example, there are reports
that the amount of insecticide used on GM insect-resistant
cotton in Australia has been reduced significantly. On the other
hand, there are some reports from overseas that GM
herbicide-tolerant crops can lead to increased herbicide use,
and more experience in Australia is needed before any such net
benefits of herbicide tolerant crops can be claimed here.
Further, in Australia, weeds are a major and costly
environmental problem and GM plants could lead to increased
weediness, especially in the case of herbicide tolerant GM
crops. The target weeds could become herbicide-resistant or the
GM crop plants could become weeds or could outcross with related
plants, leading to increased weediness.
Growing GM crops that are able to
utilise existing soil nutrients more effectively could help
reduce fertiliser run-off into waterways. Research is continuing
into the potential impact of GM crops on the soil. Results so
far show there are some changes, but scientists have not yet
determined whether they are good or bad. Similarly, the impacts
on non-target organisms is still being researched. A 2003 study
in the United Kingdom investigated the impact of GM agricultural
practice on wildlife and found varying results. Growing some GM
crops (spring canola, sugar beet) reduced wildlife, especially
birds, because there were fewer insects and weeds on which to
feed. On the other hand, GM maize enabled wildlife to increase
around it. When CSIRO scientists looked at the UK study, they
concluded the results were not all relevant to Australia because
of our very different biodiversity conditions:
-
the weeds
and creatures living in Australian crops are different from
those in the UK
-
weeds in
Australian crops are exotic invaders which are a nuisance
and our wildlife does not depend on them as wildlife does in
the UK
The implications for the
environment of potential GM animals remain unknown, but good
management practices may be able to avoid negative repercussions
in some cases. Gene technology used to control feral pests, such
as mice, rabbits and foxes, and weeds could also significantly
help the environment. However these GMOs would need to be safe
for the Australian environment and for the biological diversity
in other countries in which those animals are not pests.
Document in PDF format:
http://www.biotechnology.gov.au/library/content_library/BA_12_Rural_Nov04.pdf
|