The Use of GM Crops in Developing Countries
Regulation of GM crops in developing countries
There is considerable evidence of illegal planting of GM crops in a number of developing countries including Brazil, India and Mexico. In view of the alleged risks posed by the use of GM crops, many argue that stringent systems of governance should be implemented, which could then be deregulated. We do not share this view: such regulations are unlikely to stop illegal planting. In addition, amendments to regulations in the light of new research findings are often delayed by unrelated political and administrative disputes. It is therefore important that all developing countries which are currently involved in the implementation of the Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety consider carefully how to interpret the provisions which concern the precautionary approach, to allow for appropriate regulation before the need arises. Any highly restrictive interpretation of the precautionary approach is likely to ignore the possibility that in some cases, the use of a GM crop variety may pose fewer risks than are implied by current practices or by plausible non-GM alternatives. In applying the precautionary approach, risks implied by the option of inaction (or by alternative actions) must also be considered (paragraph 5.10).
The most appropriate approach would normally be a centralised and evidence-based safety assessment at the national or regional level. Environmental and health risks should be assessed on a case by case basis. Wherever possible, such assessments should consider information which is available from international sources, particularly with respect to data about food safety, which are more transferable than environmental risk assessments (paragraph 5.34).
In most developing countries, it will be a major financial and logistical challenge to provide the capacity and resources to undertake such evaluations. The proliferation of diverse regulations, resulting in every new GM crop being assessed for possible risks to human health and the environment in each developing country will cause problems. We therefore recommend that particular attention should be given to measures that will enable the sharing of methodologies and results. An example is environmental risk assessments for countries which have similar ecological environments. It should also be considered whether harmonised regional policies can be established, for example, by the Southern African Development Community (SADC) and the Common Market for Eastern and Southern Africa (COMESA). We welcome the recent initiative by SADC to produce guidelines on food safety assessment and management of GM crops. Developing countries should be encouraged where possible to implement standardised procedures for the assessment of environmental and health risks. Established international guidelines such as the Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety and the guidelines of the Codex Commission should be considered. Care must be taken to avoid an overly restrictive interpretation of the precautionary approach (paragraph 5.27). In this context we welcome and endorse initiatives to promote the strengthening of capacity in relevant regulatory and scientific expertise, which have recently been launched jointly by the United Nations Environment Programme and the Global Environment Facility (UNEP/GEF), and the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) (paragraphs 5.24-5.25). However, since duplication of effort can be counter-productive, and since administrative resources in developing countries are scarce, it is essential that international development efforts are coordinated.