Environmental Risk Assessment of GM plants – Concepts and Controversies

THIRD WORLD NETWORK BIOSAFETY INFORMATION SERVICE

 

 

Environmental risk assessment of genetically modified plants – concepts and controversies

Angelika Hilbeck*(1), Matthias Meier(2), Jörg Römbke(3), Stephan Jänsch(3), Hanka Teichmann(4), Beatrix Tappeser(4)

 

 

Abstract

 

Background and purpose: In Europe, the EU Directive 2001/18/EC lays out the main provisions of environmental risk assessment (ERA) of genetically modified (GM) organisms that are interpreted very differently by different stakeholders. The purpose of this paper is to: (a) describe the current implementation of ERA of GM plants in the EU and its scientific shortcomings, (b) present an improved ERA concept through the integration of a previously developed selection procedure for identification of non-target testing organisms into the ERA framework as laid

out in the EU Directive 2001/18/EC and its supplement material (Commission Decision 2002/623/EC), (c) describe the activities to be carried out in each component of the ERA and (d) propose a hierarchical testing scheme. Lastly, we illustrate the outcomes for three different crop case examples.

 

Main features: Implementation of the current ERA concept of GM crops in the EU is based on an interpretation of the EU regulations that focuses almost exclusively on the isolated bacteria-produced novel proteins with little consideration of the whole plant. Therefore, testing procedures for the effect assessment of GM plants on non-target organisms largely follow the ecotoxicological testing strategy developed for pesticides. This presumes that any potential adverse effect of the whole GM plant and the plant-produced novel compound can be extrapolated from testing of the isolated bacteriaproduced novel compound or can be detected in agronomic field trials. This has led to persisting scientific criticism.

 

Results: Based on the EU ERA framework, we present an improved ERA concept that is system oriented with the GM plant at the centre and integrates a procedure for selection of testing organisms that do occur in the receiving environment. We also propose a hierarchical testing scheme from laboratory studies to field trials and we illustrate the outcomes for three different crop case examples.

 

Conclusions and recommendations: Our proposed concept can alleviate a number of deficits identified in the current approach to ERA of GM plants. It allows the ERA to be tailored to the GM plant case and the receiving environment.

 

—————————————-

 

Author details

 

* Correspondence: angelika.hilbeck@ecostrat.ch

(1)   Ecostrat GmbH, 8032 Zurich, Hottingerstrasse 32, Zurich, 8032, Switzerland

(2)   Research Institute of Organic Agriculture (FiBL), Ackerstrasse, 5070 Frick,

Switzerland

(3)   ECT Oekotoxikologie GmbH, Böttgerstrasse 2-14, Flörsheim, 65439, Germany

(4)   Bundesamt für Naturschutz, Konstantinstrasse 110, Bonn, 53179, Germany