|
 Dr. Allen
Van Deynze, of the Seed
Biotechnology Center
(SBC) at UC Davis participated in
recent negotiations concerning the Cartagena Protocol on
Biosafety (CPB). The CPB is a protocol of the
Convention on Biological
Diversity. Although the implementation of the CPB is
currently being negotiated in the Meetings of the Parties
(MOPs), the CPB itself came into effect in September 2003. Its
objectives are to “ensure an adequate level of protection in the
field of the transfer, handling and use of Living Modified
Organisms [LMOs,
what the international community calls biotech crops] resulting
from modern biotechnology that may have adverse effects on the
conservation and sustainable use of biological diversity, taking
into account risks to human health, and specifically focusing on
transboundary movements.” The SBC took particular interest in
this subject as it directly affects public research and
co-existence of crops in the seed industry as a whole.
Only a party (a
country that has ratified the CPB - currently 132 countries) has
the right to vote on the implementation or changes to the
Protocol. The United States has not signed the CPB, and thus
does not have a vote in the final negotiations of the MOPs.
Non-Parties and organized groups such as non-government
organizations (NGOs) can have a voice by making advisory
statements. The Public
Research and Regulation Initiative (PRRI), an international
group of public researchers interested in biotechnology
regulations, was formed in 2004 to assist public researchers in
having a voice in negotiations such as the MOPs. Van Deynze
participated under the umbrella of the PRRI in the negotiations
in Montreal, Canada in May 2005, Granada, Spain in January 2006
and most recently in Curitiba, Brazil in March 2006. Over 3000
people attended the meetings in Curitiba.
The
Seed Biotechnology
Center
is particularly
concerned that many of the negotiations which will eventually
regulate the seed trade relative to biotech traits have been
developed without much input from groups representing science
and practical agriculture. Also, many groups have intentionally
misguided the public on these issues and are requesting bans on
specific research. The intent of the CPB is to facilitate the
safe implementation and commercialization of research and
innovations for human health and the environment, goals that
some biotech crops have directly addressed and that public and
private researchers are currently focusing on.
One of the
articles discussed at the Meeting of the Parties (MOP3) and
Conference of the Parties (COP8) in Curitiba was article 18.2a,
Handling, Transport and Identification of LMOs. The negotiations
were stymied on what to include on labels of commodities that
may contain LMOs. In the end, a decision was made to include
clear identification of the LMO, its intended use and web
address to access for more information. The SBC and public
researchers followed the negotiations of this article closely as
this article also directly affects the ability to exchange
materials for field research trials with biotech crops. The SBC
through the PRRI made statements supporting differentiation of
regulations for organisms that are intended for confined
research trials vs. those intended for commercial use. It is
logical that due to the smaller size and confined status, the
risk is much lower for research-scale plots than for commercial
use. The final language resulted in limiting the regulations to
LMOs intended for commercial use for food feed or processing
thus it does not apply to small-scale field trials.
The
Seed Biotechnology
Center
was actively
involved in preparing and making statements on one of the most
contentious and misunderstood issues, Genetic Use Restriction
Technologies or GURTs. GURTs are based on the implementation of
naturally-occurring gene switches found in all biological
organisms that can be activated or de-activated by external cues
or compounds. Gene switches allow specific traits to be turned
on or off in a given generation of a crop. When these switches
are used to control pollen or seed dispersal and viability, or
trait expression, they are termed GURTs. Many public and private
researchers worldwide are currently exploring the efficacy and
use of these systems as a method to produce specific compounds
in plants such as biofuels and vaccines. GURTs can complement
isolation, male sterility, crop rotation, etc., to allow
co-existence of diverse crops and traits. These gene switches
are being investigated to trigger certain traits at specific
times or developmental stages, such as degradation of cellulose
for ethanol production in plants at specific times for
processing. The SBC and PRRI agree with the decision of COP8 to
allow further research on GURTs while using the precautionary
approach and appropriate risk assessment procedures.
Furthermore, we stress that, like all novel products, GURTs
should be evaluated on a case-by-case basis. Contrary to what
some groups have claimed, the COP8 decision did not ban research
with GURTs including field trials, which can be conducted under
the regulations of the country in which the research is being
conducted
http://www.biodiv.org/doc/decisions/COP-08-dec-en.pdf
(1.5MB).
A third
controversial topic was to allow research and commercialization
of biotech trees. The SBC is involved in developing
scientifically-based position papers on this topic in
collaboration with members of the PRRI. Our position, as for any
novel product, is that scientifically-based risk assessment
methods should be used on a case-by-case basis to evaluate
biotech trees. There are many potential benefits of biotech
trees that are currently being studied, such as drought and
disease resistance and trees that produce hardwood faster. The
SBC was directly involved in developing a practical guide on
scientifice-based risk assessment methodologies (www.pubresreg.org).
The
Seed Biotechnology Center
will continue to
address regulations regarding co-existence and risk assessment
of diverse agricultural products in California, the United
States and internationally. We believe that it is important to
allow continued research and development of innovative
agricultural products to improve food, health and the
environment and to give farmers and consumers choices.
Dr. Van Deynze can be reached
at
avandeynze@ucdavis.edu |
