The UK’s Genetic Technology (Precision Breeding) Bill, currently making its way through Parliament, allows gene editing of wild and free-living species. Shouldn’t we be talking about that?
The UK government has committed itself to deregulating genetically engineered organisms created using new ‘gene editing’ technologies. But how well do its proposals align with those elsewhere in the world?
Anything can happen between now and the final version of the new Precision Breeding Bill. But government seems to have taken to heart the suggestion from last year’s Regulatory Horizons Council report to apply “creative use of guidelines, standards [and] policies” to see if it’s possible to get it right (or get away with it).
A new analysis by A Bigger Conversation suggests that, in its haste to deregulate agricultural gene technologies, the UK government is “choosing to get it wrong” by ignoring expertise from all sides.
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.
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 report suggests that while plant breeders of all kinds support the idea of ‘working together’ – there are few practical or regulatory pathways for achieving ‘co-existence’
As the UK prepares to leave the EU vast amounts of legislation are being transferred, via Statutory Instruments (SIs), from EU law to the UK. Amongst these are regulations relating […]
Following our panel discussion ‘Can Organic GMOs ever be a ‘thing’? held at Natural and Organic Products Europe in London in April, two of our panellists continued their discussion and […]
How do we deal with the increasing polarisation in the GMO debate? Care ethics, a theme coming from ecofeminism, allows, according to the authors, to assess technologies “not simply as devices designed to create a certain end experience for a user, but as transformative systems that smuggle in numerous social and political interests”