To achieve the European Green Deal's goal of 25% organic agriculture by 2030, researchers argue that new genomic techniques (NGTs) should be allowed without pre-market authorization in organic as well as conventional food production. NGTs—also known as gene editing-—are classified under the umbrella of GMOs, but they involve more subtle genetic tweaks. In an opinion paper publishing May 30 in the Cell Press journal Cell Reports Sustainability, the researchers describe how NGTs could enable rapid development of crops that are climate resilient, produce higher yields, and require less fertilizers and pesticides.
"This is an excellent opportunity to modernize European agriculture, to make it more science based, and to support the goal of improving sustainability inside the European Union," says first author Alexandra Molitorisová, a food law researcher at the University of Bayreuth.
Currently, 10% of EU farming areas are organic. Though organic farming can reduce carbon emissions and pollution from fertilizer and pesticides, Molitorisová's team says that these benefits could be negated by biodiversity losses due to expanding agricultural land, since organic agriculture requires more land to grow the same amount of food.
"The target of 25% organic land is unlikely to ensure sustainable food production in the EU if modern biotechnology, such as NGTs, is excluded from organic farming," says Molitorisová.
European institutions are currently debating how to regulate NGTs—which did not exist when the EU legislation on GMOs was adopted in 2001—in response to a proposal from the European Commission that NGT usage be allowed in conventional but not organic farming.
"Research suggests that NGTs are still something that European consumers are not completely aware of—they just do not distinguish between NGTs and GMOs," says senior author Kai Purnhagen ( @KaiPurnhagen ), Professor of Food Law at the University of Bayreuth. "There are strong indications that consumers would be willing to accept these technologies if they yield substantial benefits, and the Commission's proposal for new regulation allowing NGTs in conventional farming points in this direction."
Though NGT crops are still developed through genetic alteration, the processes usually don't involve the insertion of DNA from non-plant species. This means that, in theory, identical crops could be developed using conventional breeding methods, though it would take decades rather than months. For these reasons, the researchers argue that NGTs and GMOs should be defined and regulated separately, including in organic production.
"From the consumer's perception of naturalness, the normal breeding process is between two crossable varieties, and that is also what happens with NGTs," says Molitorisová. "So, if consumers understand the nature and benefits of this technology, it should be easier for them to accept it compared with GMOs, which might involve inserting a gene from a non-plant organism into a plant genome."
The researchers also note that the most common type of NGT, targeted mutagenesis, is very similar to mutagenesis—which uses chemical or radioactive substances to induce random genetic mutations and has never been subject to GMO regulation in the EU, even for organic farms.
"If mutagenesis had not been exempted from GMO legislation, the estimation is that 80%–90% of the cereal products on the European market would have been subject to GMO labeling," says Purnhagen.
The team highlights that allowing NGTs in conventional but not organic agriculture creates a formidable hurdle in terms of NGT identification, labeling, and traceability.
"At the moment, there are unresolved practical problems with the identification of NGTs inside of food, feed, or seeds," says Molitorisová. "One rational alternative is to allow NGTs in organic production, because if NGT organisms are not identifiable, they are also technically unavoidable."
Ultimately, the researchers say that the decision to allow NGTs in organic farming should be made by the organic farming and consumer communities—for example, by way of citizens' juries or food councils.
"Organic consumers care about the environment and sustainability. For organic farmers, accepting this technology is a way to speak to those consumers," says Purnhagen.
