Hype versus reality: Report sheds light on the market reality of New GMOs

A report reveals the discrepancy between the hype surrounding New GMOs and the worldwide market reality.

The “New GMOs Market Report: New GMOs in Cultivation, in Development, withdrawn from the Market” was published jointly yesterday by the European Non-GMO Industry Association (ENGA) and the US Non-GMO Project.

It is the first in a series of annual reports intended to inform the food and feed sectors about key developments of New GMOs.

New GMO crop cultivation

The report highlights that only three New GMO crops are currently being cultivated globally: two in the US and one in Japan. Two herbicide- and insect-resistant maize varieties developed with CRISPR are being cultivated in the US. Both varieties are also transgenic. 

In Japan, a tomato with increased GABA content is on the market, intended to lower blood pressure and also developed with CRISPR.

It also says that there are only three genetically engineered GMO plants on the market worldwide, and 49 in development, with two of the earliest examples already having been withdrawn.

“The organizations say the report’s key finding is clear: those in the food industry wishing to produce without GMOs still can (and should) continue to do so. There is no flood of New GMOs on the global market.”

Speaking to Food Ingredients First, Heike Moldenhauer, secretary General of ENGAS, expands on the claim that the food industry should explicitly exclude New GMOs from its supplier requirements.

“The EU Commission and the Council want to abolish risk assessment, labeling, and traceability for 94% of all New GMOs. However, the food sector is liable for all products it places on the market, including New GMOs.”

“Despite the hype, the evidence from our report is overwhelming: New GMOs are only a promise and are far from a reality on the market.” 

“The rationale behind the hype is that enthusiasm for this technology and these plants shall lead to their deregulation; that means abolishing risk assessments as well as traceability and labeling in order to ensure faster and easier market access.”

“New GMOs are presented as solutions for all kinds of problems that today’s agriculture faces: pesticide overuse, climate change, and biodiversity loss. On the other hand, the reality that our report has found is that only three plants are being cultivated, two of which are herbicide-resistant, so certainly no contribution to pesticide reduction, and the third is a product intended to lower blood pressure. Why this discrepancy?”

“This is a question for the biotech industry, which does not deliver what it promises, even in countries with extensive deregulation such as the US.” 

Sustainability in question

Moldenhauer also highlights how, despite widespread claims, not a single New GMO currently on the market delivers on sustainability promises, one of the main reasons their proponents are pushing to deregulate them.

The EU Commission justifies its legislative proposal for extensive deregulation of New GMOs by claiming that they contribute to sustainability. The proposal reads: “There is significant demand in the Union and globally for NGT plants because of their potential to contribute to addressing current challenges in the agri-food system. The European Green Deal’s Farm to Fork Strategy specifically identifies new techniques, including biotechnology, as a possible tool to increase the sustainability of agri-food systems and contribute to guaranteeing food security.”

“Our report identifies just two crops “in development” that potentially could contribute to sustainability, a salt-tolerant and a drought tolerant crop,” Moldenhauer adds.