A framework for a European network for a systematic environmental impact assessment of genetically modified organisms (GMO)

Abstract

A peer-reviewed open-access journalFrieder Graef et al. / BioRisk 7: 73-97 (2012) AbstractThe assessment of the impacts of growing genetically modified (GM) crops remains a major political and scientific challenge in Europe. Concerns have been raised by the evidence of adverse and unexpected environmental effects and differing opinions on the outcomes of environmental risk assessments (ERA). The current regulatory system is hampered by insufficiently developed methods for GM crop safety testing and introduction studies. Improvement to the regulatory system needs to address the lack of well designed GM crop monitoring frameworks, professional and financial conflicts of interest within the ERA research and testing community, weaknesses in consideration of stakeholder interests and specific regional conditions, and the lack of comprehensive assessments that address the environmental and socio-economic risk assessment interface. To address these challenges, we propose a European Network for systematic GMO impact assessment (ENSyGMO) with the aim directly to enhance ERA and post-market environmental monitoring (PMEM) of GM crops, to harmonize and ultimately secure the long-term socio-political impact of the ERA process and the PMEM in the EU. These goals would be achieved with a multi-dimensional and multi-sector approach to GM crop impact assessment, targeting the variability and complexity of the EU agro-environment and the relationship with relevant socio-economic factors. Specifically, we propose to develop and apply methodologies for both indicator and field site selection for GM crop ERA and PMEM, embedded in an EU-wide typology of agro-environments. These methodologies should be applied in a pan-European field testing network using GM crops. The design of the field experiments and the sampling methodology at these field sites should follow specific hypotheses on GM crop effects and use state-of-the art sampling, statistics and modelling approaches. To address public concerns and create confidence in the ENSyGMO results, actors with relevant specialist knowledge from various sectors should be involved.

Potential exposure of butterflies in protected habitats by Bt maize cultivation: A case study in Switzerland

“…In addition, the agricultural policy in Switzerland aims to enhance biodiversity in agriculturally managed areas (BAFU and BLW, 2008;Walter et al, 2012). So far, environmental risk assessment of transgenic crops has focussed mostly on non-target organisms and biodiversity within crop fields (Graef et al, 2012;Hilbeck et al, 2015). However, species outside arable fields are exposed and may be harmed, too, as GM material such as pollen can be transported into protected sites nearby (Menzel et al, 2005).…”

Plant-associated and soil microbiota composition as a novel criterion for the environmental risk assessment of genetically modified plants

“…However, there is a growing number of publications pointing at the necessity of such investigations of GM plants. [64][65][66][67][68][69] Possibly, such investigations are important in the evaluation of complex new and emerging geneediting techniques, such as clustered regularly interspaced short palindromic repeats (CRISPR), oligonucleotide directed mutagenesis (ODMs), meganucleases (EMNs), zinc finger nucleases (ZFNs), and transcription activator-like effector nucleases (TALENs) suggested for the plants. 70…”

Why glyphosate is not the issue with Roundup

“…However, our critics claimed that the health agencies' opinions provided to their governments, which coincided with the opinions of Monsanto, were in agreement with the opinion of the scientific community-which was often silent because the raw data were confidential. Many scientists, including myself, made it clear that there was no consensus regarding these views [50]. This was ignored by the authorities, but science progressed.…”