EU and UK attempts to change genome editing regulations could have opened the door to interesting, even productive discussions. Instead they have further entrenched the unhelpful polarisation of early GMO debates.
Framing genetic engineering as ‘natural’ fuels conflict and creates distractions in the discussions about the technology, says Jack Heinemann – including those around the newly commercialised techniques of genome editing and gene silencing.
While promising, techno solutions in agriculture also bring inevitable questions. A new report from IPES Food and ETC Group asks and whether such innovations free us from, or perpetuate, “agribusiness-as-usual”.
A new policy briefing from the Genome Editing and Agriculture: Policies, Practices and Public Perceptions (GEAP3) project discusses choices and dilemmas facing policy makers and societal stakeholders in the European Union and the United Kingdom asks bigger questions.
In September of this year, the first-ever public detection method for a gene-edited crop was announced. The new method detects a herbicide-tolerant (SU) rapeseed variety that was developed using gene […]
Panellists at our recent webinar Sense, Science and Sustainability tackled the question of genetic engineering in food and farming through a sustainability lens– leading to some surprising admissions. Co-hosted with […]
Our upcoming webinar brings together specialists from farming, campaigning, science, business and media for an in-depth discussion about whether gene editing is not just desirable but necessary if farming is to reach its goals of higher sustainability and better welfare.
Reclaiming a baseline of accountability is the first step in building public confidence in regulatory systems that work for people as well as science that the public believes in.
The coronavirus, and the global lockdown which has been the response to it, has taken its toll on many different types of organisations and ours is no exception. Here’s how we plan to continue our work.