The Real and Perceived Risks of Genetically Modified Organisms – With a View on Changing Policy Following Brexit
V.
SUMMARY OF RECOMMENDATIONS
In summary this paper makes suggestions on how to regulate GMOs in a manner that is science based and proportionate. The overachieving aim is to encourage policy that fosters innovation, improves productivity, decreases the UK’s impact on the environment and climate, while fostering an atmosphere in which consumers feel safe. Here we briefly review each of the themes we discussed in this paper (For a more detailed discussion please Section IV. above).
•
To foster agricultural innovation. The UK is a renowned world-leader for innovation in life sciences. However, innovation in genetic modification technologies has been hindered by misguided regulation, which has halted the transition from pioneering research to in-field implementations. A deregulation of GMO technologies would encourage research centres, start-ups and small-to-medium enterprises to invest in practical and profitable applications for genomic engineering and agricultural biotechnology.
•
To reduce the environmental impact of agriculture. Genetically modified crops have the potential to reduce the impact of agriculture on biodiversity loss and climate change. We presented, in the introduction, multiple examples of GM technologies which have reduced pesticide applications and greenhouse gas emission of agriculture and farming, whilst maintaining “economical profitability”.
•
To maintain high food quality and environmental standards. The safety and quality of food for human consumption should remain a priority for the government independently of Brexit. Although GM technologies to date have been proved to be safe, we advise for transgenic organisms to require approval for growth and sale upon adequate testing for potential side effects on humans and the environment. Under our advice, cisgenic and gene edited organisms should be regulated like conventionally bred organisms and should not require special approval.
•
To maintain consumer trust with transparent labelling and dialogue. The scientific consensus is that GM crops are safe, however public opinion has not caught on due to general misinformation. Given the bias in public perception against GMOs,
The Wilberforce Society Cambridge, UK
www.thewilberforcesociety.co.uk
67
March 2021
