Effect of PP on the regulation of technical innovations (Blog 3)

Consequences of the regulation based on the breeding process:

The regulation of breeding process in Europe would severely hamper the use of new breeding processes because the procedure genetically modified plants must pass is costly and time-consuming (Hartung et al. (2013)). As a consequence, food from genetic modified plants gets more expensive than food produced in a conventional procedure. Another point is that agriculture in Europe will rely more on conventional breeding and so it is not possible to produce new plant varieties (Hartung et al. (2013)).

The research on genetically modified food will lose his attraction because it is too expensive and some promising approaches never will get implemented because the approval procedure is too complex. So the scientists will focus more on other methods like radiation breeding.

PP for regulation based on the breeding process:

The Precautionary approach was originally created with the aim of protecting the environment, later the European Commission renamed the approach as a precautionary principle and extended it to cover policies to safeguard consumers and human, animal and plant health (Tagliabue (2016)). Since the PP was not particular developed for the regulation of breeding processes the principle is not an optimal method to use for the regulation. The PP places additional regulatory burden on GMO utilization, in consequence it reduces returns from innovation, limits utilisation of GMOs worldwide and provides misplace incentives for research (Ingeborg-Myhr (2007). It is possible to use the PP when just the product has to be considered but when it also is important to assess the way how something was produced the PP achieves his limits.

PP and organic agriculture:

If the organic agriculture had not been invented until today it maybe would be regulated by the precautionary principle. In this case it had to be proven that the hole organic agriculture is harmless for humans and the environment before the products can be sold on the market. Not only the products would have to be tested but also the hole process of growing which includes watering, fertilization and many other things. The development of organic agriculture would progress very slowly because all this steps are very time-consuming and expensive. In the end the diversity of food would not be as big as it is now because there are too many provisions that takes account and the development of organic agriculture would not be lucrative.

Genome editing:

In my opinion it is very important to observe the development on genome editing critical and precise. But I also think that it would be enough just to check the products and not the overall production. In the end the human population especially comes in contact with the end product and it is important not to forget that genome editing is not primarily a danger but a chance. In my opinion it is important that for all breeding processes the same specifications have to be considered. Therefore, I think when plant production with genome editing has to be regulated it is also important to regulate radiation breeding.

Literature:

F. Hartung, J. Schiemann. 2013. Precise plant breeding using new genome editing techniques: opportunities, safety and regulation in the EU. The Plant Journal.

G. Tagliabue. 2016. The Precautionary principle: its misunderstandings and misuses in relation to “GMOs”. New Biotechnology.

A. Ingeborg-Myhr. 2007. The Precautionary Principle in GMO regulations. Norwegian Institute Of Gene Ecology.