Annotated Bibliography Entry

Reference: Nuffield 1999
Title: Genetically Modified Crops: the ethical and social issues
Authors: Nuffield Council on Bioethics.
Publisher: Nuffield Council on Bioethics, 28 Bedford Square, London UK WC1B 3EG
Publication details: May 1999. 164p

Summary
Genetically modified crops: the controversy
Findings and Conclusions
Table of Contents
Go to Annex: Chapter 8 Conclusions and Recommendations

 

Back to UK page

 

Summary

Many sectors of society are concerned with the implications of GM crops and have a legitimate interest in the outcome of decisions about them. The principal objections concern possible harm to human health, damage to the environment and unease about the ‘unnatural’ status of the technology. Some groups have doubts about the adequacy of the present regulatory regimes to meet all of their concerns. They also have varying degrees of mistrust in the ability of the regulatory bodies and those who advise them to deal with all the issues or to bring a wide enough perspective to bear.

This report examines the ethical and social issues associated with the development and cultivation of genetically modified (GM) crops, particularly in relation to:

• The scientific background and techniques used in genetic modification
• The potential of GM crops
• Commercial and legal implications
• Implications for the developing world
• Consumer concerns
• Environmental concerns
• Regulation and policy issues

The Terms of Reference of the Working Party were:

1.  To briefly review the developments on the genetic modification of crops and their impact on human food consumption and the environment.

2.  To identify and consider the ethical and social implications of these developments including: Issues of food safety and public health; issues of environmental protection; the public interest and the maintenance of consumer choice and public confidence; the appropriateness of the criteria used at present by regulatory bodies in the UK and in the EU; the implications for less developed countries; the implications of intellectual property issues; the responsibilities of scientists in advising policy makers on these issues, and to make recommendations.

Back to top

Genetically modified crops: the controversy

Genetic modification involves the direct introduction of desirable characteristics by artificial transfer of foreign or synthetic DNA (deoxyribonucleic acid, the genetic material) into an organism. A GM organism or GMO as therefore been altered in a way that does not involve mating and/or conventional genetic recombination (EC Directive 90/220/EEC). 

The introduction of genetically modified (GM) crops into the environment and the food chain has become highly controversial in the United Kingdom (UK), parts of Europe and in other parts of the world. The possibility that GM crops will form a large proportion of the plants grown by farmers in the United States (US), and Europe within the next decade has aroused reactions ranging from outrage and unease to acceptance. By contrast, their introduction has been greeted with near-indifference by consumers in the US and Canada.

The genetic modification of plants involves transferring DNA (deoxyribonucleic acid), the genetic material, from a plant or bacterium, or even an animal, into a different plant species. Because we can increasingly identify which gene or genes determine particular characteristics, the appropriate genes can now be inserted directly into the plants we wish to modify. Although techniques required to create GM crops are recent and relatively sophisticated, genetic modification is in most respects an extension of what has been happening for ten thousand years. The primitive ancestors of almost all modern food crops are barely recognisable to the lay person; maize ears, for instance, were half an inch long rather than the eight or nine inches of their modern descendants.

The principle objections to GM crops and the food products made from them concern possible harm to human health, damage to the environment and unease about the ‘unnatural’ status of the technology. Many members of the UK public also object to what they perceive as an imposition of a new and uncertain technology that, in the case of GM soya, does not offer them obvious benefits. Where GM food has been cheaper or better-flavoured consumers have been more willing to purchase it.

Concerns over human health have arisen on several counts. The fact that GM crops can bring together new gene combinations that are not found in nature has led to unease about possible effects on health over the longer term. Alarmist media reports of negative health effects in animals fed with GM potatoes are likely to have reinforced such fears. The use of antibiotic-resistance marker genes in plant genetic modification has also focused attention onto the possible risk of increasing human resistance to antibiotics through the food chain. The possibility of increasing and unpredictable exposure to allergens through new gene combinations has also been raised. Recent failures on the part of UK government agencies and departments to deal adequately with the BSE (bovine spongiform encephalitis) outbreak have further undermined public confidence.

Environmental concerns have focused on the fear that GM herbicide-tolerant crops might encourage farmers to use more broad spectrum herbicides with a negative impact on insect and bird life. Genes conferring herbicide tolerance might also migrate from crop plants to their wild relatives resulting in herbicide-tolerant weeds. There are also fears about damage to non-target species by insect-resistant crops and the inadvertent creation of new viruses. Irrespective of their safety, GM crops are only one further step in the industrialisation of agriculture. How much of a risk GM crops are to the environment is difficult to judge at this stage. They might damage it in some circumstances and enhance it in others. It could be that much of the dislike of GM crops stems from guilt by association: they are produced by agrochemical and seed companies and they are an element in ‘non-organic’ farming. They are also seen by some as ‘unnatural’.

Obviously, GM crops should be marketed only when they meet appropriate safety and environmental standards. Although they offer the prospect of significant improvements in human welfare, there are risks that need to be guarded against. GM plant technology is at an early stage of development. So far, the genetic modifications made to food crops have mainly affected the plants’ tolerance to herbicides and insect pests in crops grown in the developed world. Such crops may allow lower levels of agrochemical use and more efficient farm management. However, the scope of improvements offered by genetic modification in future is much wider and consumer benefits more evident. They include increased food micronutrient levels, removal of food allergens and the production of vaccines. More important is the expansion of the use of GM crops outside the developed world. Globally, the ability to engineer resistance to salty soil and in the longer-term to modify cereal crops to use atmospheric nitrogen could considerably enhance the diet of the very poorest of the world’s citizens. The application of genetic modification to crops extends well beyond foodstuffs. Cotton has already been modified to resist important pests such as the boll weevil. The blue colouring that jeans manufacturers use has even been introduced into some cotton varieties. The longer-term perspective suggests that industrial fuels and especially fuel for electricity generation could increasingly be based on GM plants rather than fossil fuels, and that construction materials could soon be grown in a tailor-made fashion.

A question raised by these arguments is whether the existing UK regulatory system achieves what it should. Regulation is there to protect public health, to protect the environment, to promote or enable consumer choice and to foster useful research. The long-term nature of many of the risks pointed to by critics of GM crops raises the question of whether existing and proposed regulatory schemes adequately monitor both field trials and commercial introductions. Public policy in the UK must properly accommodate the safety issues raised by GM crops and, in so doing, restore public confidence. We also attach great importance to the legitimacy of consumer choice and to ensuring so far as possible that consumers can avoid GM products if they so wish, whatever their reasons may be. The question of how to decide whether GM crops are ‘unnatural’ to an unacceptable degree is more difficult to address.

Concentrating exclusively on the safety and environmental impact of GM crops in the UK and Europe may distract both the public and governments from giving proper attention to the benefits they could bring. Proponents of GM crops argue that their introduction is necessary for the developing world. Such arguments have been greeted sceptically with claims that food security can be achieved by redistribution rather than increases in output. This argument raises hard political questions about how likely redistributive measures are, as compared with the introduction of GM crops. It has also been argued that as long as the development of GM crops is based in the US and Europe, there will be little research on their application to the developing world. The prospect of broad patents on basic GM technologies also presents particular and potentially serious difficulties for developing countries.

The possibility that GM crops could make a substantial contribution to providing sufficient food for an expanding world is, on its own, a solid reason for engaging in the research that underlies their development. Commercial incentives require that private companies that engage in the research can patent commercially useful results. But will such companies be willing in the future to grant licences on favourable terms for commercial research intended to benefit developing countries? How could governments help secure benefits of genetic modification for developing countries?

In the developed world the fact that the first GM foods have had no or little obvious benefits for consumers has contributed to the perception that they are unnecessary. Genetic modification could, however, be directed towards enhancing the flavour and quality of the food that reaches the tables of consumers in developed countries. At present it is more often used to enhance storage qualities and transportability. In economic terms, these are important qualities but have little impact on the consumer. If the public were given the opportunity to be better informed about GM crops, it might encourage supermarkets and farmers alike to produce food which offers more direct consumer benefits.

In this report, the Working Party sets out to examine the ethical and social issues associated with the introduction of GM technology. It aims to inform the public debate in the UK and elsewhere around the world. It also hopes to assist the further development of public policies that will secure the benefits of GM crops and lead to the development of a regulatory system that protects human health and the environment and at the same time commands public confidence. No ethical concerns can be all things to all people and we accept that some religious and other philosophical applications will have a different starting point to our own. This report is grounded in liberal, scientific values and takes a broadly utilitarian approach to ethics, a starting point that is shared by most people in the UK.

Back to top

 

Findings and conclusions

The Working Party has examined the ethical issues that are raised by the development and application of GM plant technology in world agriculture and food security. Its perspective on GM crops has been guided by consideration of three main ethical principles: the principle of general human welfare, the maintenance of people’s rights and the principle of justice. Some of these considerations, such as the need to ensure food security for present and future generations, safety for consumers and care of the environment have been straightforward and broadly utilitarian. Others, stemming from the concern that GM crops are ‘unnatural’, have been more complex.

The Working Party accepts that some genetic modifications are truly novel but concludes that there is no clear dividing line which could prescribe what types of genetic modification are unacceptable because they are considered by some to be ‘unnatural’. It takes the view that the genetic modification of plants does not differ to such an extent from conventional breeding that it is in itself morally objectionable. GM technology does, however, have the potential to lead to significant changes in farming practices in food production and in the environment. The Working Party concludes that it is now necessary to maintain and develop further a powerful public policy framework to guide and regulate the way GM technology is applied in the UK. It recommends that an over-arching, independent biotechnology advisory committee is established to consider within a broad remit, the scientific and ethical issues together with the public values associated with GM crops.

Recommendations about the needs for improved risk assessment methods, post-release monitoring and the evaluation of cumulative and indirect environmental impacts are made. The Working Party does not believe that there is enough evidence of actual or potential harm to justify a moratorium on GM crop research, field trials or limited release into the environment at this stage. Public concern about the introduction of GM crops has led to calls for bans on GM food and moratoria on plantings. The Working Party concludes that all the GM food so far on the market in this country is safe for human consumption. A genuine choice of non-GM foods should remain available, with foods that contain identifiable GM material being appropriately labelled. The Working Party urges the Government and the scientific community to share their responsibilities in disseminating reliable information about the underlying science and to respond to public concerns.

The application of genetic modification to crops has the potential to bring about significant benefits, such as improved nutrition, enhanced pest resistance, increased yields and new products such as vaccines. The moral imperative for making GM crops readily and economically available to developing countries that want them is compelling. The Working Party recommends a major increase in financial support for GM crop research directed at the employment-intensive production of food staples together with the implementation of international safeguards.

The report concludes that GM crops represent an important new technology that ought to have the potential to do much good in the world provided that proper safeguards are maintained or introduced. All those who are involved in developing the new technology, whether they are researchers in the public sector, in agrochemical or agricultural businesses or farmers, or food manufacturers and retailers need to recognise and accept a broad responsibility to the public. They need to ensure that ethical concerns are taken account of, that their new technologies and products are safe for human consumption and avoid further harm to the environment, that the potential of GM technology is harnessed to meet the most urgent food needs of the world as well as commercial benefit, that impartial information is made widely available to the public and that consumer choice is fully respected.

The introduction of GM crops is at present only at an experimental field trial stage in the UK. But the pace of development of new crops is accelerating, and it is timely to review the considerations that should guide public policy in this area and to strengthen the framework in certain respects. At the present time public concern about the introduction of GM crops and food is running at a high level. The principal objections concern possible harm to human health, damage to the environment and unease about the ‘unnatural’ state of the technology. There are calls for bans on GM food and moratoria on GM plantings. The report does not believe there is evidence of harm to justify such action.

The report does not advocate a moratorium on research, field trials, or limited release into the environment, irrespective of the likelihood that such a moratorium could be legally challenged. It does not see any grounds for it that cannot be better dealt with in other ways. Nor, if these trials proceed successfully, should there be a longer-term blanket moratorium on commercial growing. The report, however, believes that energetic action by the Government is needed before any commercial plantings are undertaken in the UK in order to protect the wider environment, to ensure that choice is available for those who do not wish to consume GM foods, and to allay public concern. The Working Party recommends that the next step should be to allow some commercial planting of the most promising GM crops, on a limited and closely monitored basis, designed to identify and contain any adverse environmental and safety effects. At the same time it recommends that steps are taken to ensure that appropriate amounts of non-GM planting continue with a segregated production chain to support the availability of non-GM foods in the shops to satisfy that demand.

The EU has put in place a regulatory framework that has provided a reasonable set of controls for the experimental stage of the technology. But the working party considers that the UK government now needs to take further steps to determine the desirability of particular types of genetic modification, to strengthen the safeguards against specific risks, to enable broader impacts to be better evaluated and managed, to strengthen consumer choice, to secure better dissemination of information and to understand more fully the ethical basis of concern.

The scope of improvements offered by genetic modification in the future is much wider and consumer benefits much more evident. However, concentrating exclusively on the safety and environmental impact of GM crops in the UK and Europe may distract both the public and governments from giving proper attention to the benefits they could bring to developing and developed countries. Industry must play its part in making the technology available to developing countries. The research investment in plant genetic modification by the private sector has already greatly accelerated the development of the technology. The need for concerted action to assist in the safe application of plant genetic modification by industry in partnership with governments, charitable foundations and international research organisations to food staples of the developing world is urgent. 

Go to Annex: Chapter 8 Conclusions and Recommendations

Back to top

 

Table of Contents 

Council membership and terms of reference iii
Preface v
Acknowledgements vi
Working Party membership xi
Working Party terms of reference xiii

Executive summary xv

Overview Genetically modified crops: the controversy 1

Chapter 1 Genetic technologies: scientific possibilities and ethical principles 5
Introduction 6
Welfare and the role of government regulation 8
Consumer choice and rights 9
The principle of justice10
The natural/unnatural boundary 13
Taboos and moral conservatism 15
Conclusions 17

Chapter 2 The scientific basis of genetic modification 19
Introduction 20
Conventional plant breeding 20
Plant genetic transformation 21
The experimental components of successful transformation 22
Transformation methods 22
Selectable markers 23
Applications of plant transformation 23
New transformation technologies 25
Potential problems with GM crops 26
Testing for transgenics 27
How far will the science progress? 28
How far have GM crops entered agriculture? 31
Issues arising from the introduction of GM plants 32
GM DNA transfer in animals 32
Conclusions 35

Chapter 3 Issues related to commercial implementation 37
Introduction 38
Commercial investment in GM technologies 38
The growth of the commercial sector 39
Where are the decisions taken regarding the goals for GM technology? 41
Consolidation of the plant biotechnology industry 42
The concept of property rights 43
The development of intellectual property in the life sciences 44
Patenting living organisms 45
Patenting DNA 46
Patents on basic technologies  46
Patenting and the impact of genomics 48
Patents and commercialisation issues  50
Commercialisation and developing countries issues 50 |
Licensing 51
Compulsory licensing 52
Broad claims 52
Patented technologies which override theUPOV convention 52
Consequences of raw material substitution 54
Globalisation and commodification 55
Accountability in the international dimension 55
Conclusions 55

Chapter 4 Impact on developing countries: implications for UK policy 57
Introduction 58
The need for increased food supply 59
Under-nutrition in the developing world 60
The global slowdown in yield 61
The impact of the Green Revolution 62
Increasing yields: alternatives to GM crop varieties 62
Field yields and incentives for farmers: why ‘yield potential’ matters 64
The potential of GM crops to raise field yields 65
GM crop research on tropical staples 65
The implications of GM crops for developing country trade 66
GM crops and the poor: getting the debate back on the rails 67
Prospects for environmentally-friendly GM crop growth in poorer countries and the UK role 69
Regulation of GM crops in developing countries 71
Developing countries’ regulatory requirements: international aspects 74
Intellectual property rights and the TRIPS agreement 76
Apomixis or termination? 77
The need for public sector research 78
Hidden risks of neglecting poor people’s GM crops 78
Conclusions 79

Chapter 5 Consumer choice and food quality 81
UK consumer attitudes 83
European attitudes 87
Potential benefits of genetic modification 87
Public awareness of GM technology 89
Public information 90
Consumer choice 91
Responses to consumer concerns 92
Implications for public policy 93
Conclusions 94

Chapter 6 The environmental impact of genetically modified plants 95
Ethical considerations 96
How does genetic modification differ from ‘conventional’ plant breeding? 98
The analogy between genetically modified crops and plant ‘exotics’ 98
What benefits and risks do GM crops bring to the environment? 99
Potential benefits to the environment as a consequence of using GM technology 100
Concerns about possible environmental changes as a consequence of using GM technology 100
Loss of biodiversity 103
Conclusion 105

Chapter 7 From principles to policy 107
Principles: recapitulation 108
The objectives of public policy bearing on the use of GM plants 110
The regulatory regimes 112
Weaknesses of the present regulatory regime 113
A broader basis for risk assessment 114
Risk assessment for the environment 114
Risk assessment for food safety 116
The case for monitoring 116
Cumulative and indirect impacts on the environment 116
Food and consumer choice 118  

Chapter 8 Conclusions and recommendations 121
Introduction: the present state of genetic modification of plants 122
Ethical considerations 123
Minimising risk: the role of regulation 124
Risk assessment methodology 125
Monitoring 125
Cumulative and indirect impacts 126
Food and consumer choice 126
External advice and advisory bodies 127
Disseminating information 129
Commercialisation 129
Commercialisation and intellectual property rights 130
Commercialisation and developing country issues 131
Broad claims 133
Impact on developing countries: implications for UK policy 133
Conclusion 136

Appendices
Appendix 1 Rats and potatoes at the Rowett Institute 139
Appendix 2 Advisory Committees 143
Appendix 3 Fact-finding meetings 145
Appendix 4 Method of working and consultation 147
Appendix 5 Consultation responses 155

Glossary and acronyms 159

Back to top

Web site: http://www.nuffieldbioethics.org/publications