EU Regulations on the Traceability and Detection of GMOs: Difficulties in Interpretation, Implementation and Compliance

ABSTRACT Europe has probably the strictest GMO regulation in the world. Its objectives are to give max-imum protection of public health and the environment, while at the same time providing a science-based regulatory structure where biotechnology can flourish. In contrast to the situation in the USA, European opinion on the health and environmental biosafety of GMOs has been highly polarized, with the result that the public has expressed the desire of having an informed choice in what they are eating. Consequently, the European Union has introduced legislation on the trace-ability and detection of GMOs, including labelling of food and feed containing GMOs, or derived products thereof, above a defined threshold of fortuitous presence. This review article sum-marizes EC regulations, directives and recommendations on traceability and labelling, and dis-cusses the practical problems involved in their implementation. These include the definition of the labelling threshold and the units of measure, sampling of large cargos, mixtures of GMOs, stacked genes, unauthorized GMOs, unknown GMOs and asynchronous approval. The ways in which the EC integrated project Co-Extra is contributing to the resolution of these problems are also discussed.

Download full-text


Available from: John Davison, Sep 25, 2015
1,282 Reads
  • Source
    • "This invitation resulted in the adoption of Regulation 1829/2003 on the authorization procedure for genetically modified food and feed, and Regulation 1830/2003 concerning the traceability and labelling of GMOs and the traceability of food and feed products produced from GMOs. Even more importantly, Regulation 1946/2003 was explicitly designed to implement the provisions of the Cartagena Protocol on preventing biotechnological risks (Davison and Bertheau 2007 "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The literature on international regulatory regimes has highlighted how rival standards can create different points of convergence. Scholarly attention has also focused on how the European Union (EU) and the United States (USA) attempt to 'export' their environmental standards internationally. Here, we explore the effectiveness of these attempts by means of third states' decisions to ratify the Carta-gena Protocol on Biosafety to the Convention on Biological Diversity, a multilateral environmental agreement regulating genetically modified organisms that is promoted by the EU but opposed by the USA. Our findings confirm that both rivals are able to influence the ratification decision of states, but they also suggest that these effects may have different origins. Countries relying more heavily on US markets for food exports tend to be less likely to ratify the Cartagena Protocol, while countries that have applied for EU membership are more likely to ratify the protocol.
    Public Administration 05/2015; DOI:10.1111/padm.12176 · 1.57 Impact Factor
  • Source
    • "The proposed regulation amends Directive 2001/18/EC to allow Member States to restrict or prohibit the cultivation of GMOs in their territory. Source: adapted from Vicario, 2010, Davison and Bertheau, 2007 and Europa, 2008b. As of January 18, 2011, the EU Register of GM Food and Feed lists 38 GM authorized products for food and/or feed use: 6 cotton varietals, 22 maize, 1 bacterial biomass, 1 yeast biomass, 3 varieties of rapeseed, 1 potato, 3 soybean types and 1 sugar beet (EC, n.d.b). "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Economies of scale are an alternative source of growth particularly at a time when countries are suffering from global economic malaise. The proposed EU-India free trade agreement holds substantial promise as this will create a combined market of over one and a half billion and generate economies of scale from intra-industry trade, which are likely to be concentrated in manufactured products such as chemicals, machinery and transport equipment. Bold action is needed on the part of politicians in both the EU and India to successfully negotiate the agreement given that this will enable both countries to reap the efficiency gains of global economies of scale, provide a significant competitive advantage over other major economies and deliver the necessary spur to shake both the EU and India out of their current economic stagnation.
    Asia Europe Journal 03/2014; 13(1):41-55. DOI:10.1007/s10308-014-0404-8 · 0.05 Impact Factor
  • Source
    • "gentechnik/verbraucherinnenschutz/kennzeichnung/nutzende_unternehmen/). Since the first commercialization of GMOs in third countries, the EU has been facing a great number of alerts (Davison and Bertheau, 2007, 2008). In most of the cases, these alerts resulted from a misappropriate segregation of approved GMO (Starlink™ maize), or the seeds' commercialization of unapproved GMOs (US Bt10 instead of Bt11 maize), or the release of unapproved GMOs as in the case of US LL601 rice or Chinese Bt63 and Kefeng 6 rice. "
    Recent Trends for Enhancing the Diversity and Quality of Soybean Products, 10/2011; , ISBN: 978-953-307-533-4
Show more