Cargando…

Regulatory hurdles for genome editing: process- vs. product-based approaches in different regulatory contexts

Novel plant genome editing techniques call for an updated legislation regulating the use of plants produced by genetic engineering or genome editing, especially in the European Union. Established more than 25 years ago and based on a clear distinction between transgenic and conventionally bred plant...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Sprink, Thorben, Eriksson, Dennis, Schiemann, Joachim, Hartung, Frank
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Springer Berlin Heidelberg 2016
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4903111/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27142995
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00299-016-1990-2
_version_ 1782437067676975104
author Sprink, Thorben
Eriksson, Dennis
Schiemann, Joachim
Hartung, Frank
author_facet Sprink, Thorben
Eriksson, Dennis
Schiemann, Joachim
Hartung, Frank
author_sort Sprink, Thorben
collection PubMed
description Novel plant genome editing techniques call for an updated legislation regulating the use of plants produced by genetic engineering or genome editing, especially in the European Union. Established more than 25 years ago and based on a clear distinction between transgenic and conventionally bred plants, the current EU Directives fail to accommodate the new continuum between genetic engineering and conventional breeding. Despite the fact that the Directive 2001/18/EC contains both process- and product-related terms, it is commonly interpreted as a strictly process-based legislation. In view of several new emerging techniques which are closer to the conventional breeding than common genetic engineering, we argue that it should be actually interpreted more in relation to the resulting product. A legal guidance on how to define plants produced by exploring novel genome editing techniques in relation to the decade-old legislation is urgently needed, as private companies and public researchers are waiting impatiently with products and projects in the pipeline. We here outline the process in the EU to develop a legislation that properly matches the scientific progress. As the process is facing several hurdles, we also compare with existing frameworks in other countries and discuss ideas for an alternative regulatory system.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4903111
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2016
publisher Springer Berlin Heidelberg
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-49031112016-06-27 Regulatory hurdles for genome editing: process- vs. product-based approaches in different regulatory contexts Sprink, Thorben Eriksson, Dennis Schiemann, Joachim Hartung, Frank Plant Cell Rep Opinion Paper Novel plant genome editing techniques call for an updated legislation regulating the use of plants produced by genetic engineering or genome editing, especially in the European Union. Established more than 25 years ago and based on a clear distinction between transgenic and conventionally bred plants, the current EU Directives fail to accommodate the new continuum between genetic engineering and conventional breeding. Despite the fact that the Directive 2001/18/EC contains both process- and product-related terms, it is commonly interpreted as a strictly process-based legislation. In view of several new emerging techniques which are closer to the conventional breeding than common genetic engineering, we argue that it should be actually interpreted more in relation to the resulting product. A legal guidance on how to define plants produced by exploring novel genome editing techniques in relation to the decade-old legislation is urgently needed, as private companies and public researchers are waiting impatiently with products and projects in the pipeline. We here outline the process in the EU to develop a legislation that properly matches the scientific progress. As the process is facing several hurdles, we also compare with existing frameworks in other countries and discuss ideas for an alternative regulatory system. Springer Berlin Heidelberg 2016-05-03 2016 /pmc/articles/PMC4903111/ /pubmed/27142995 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00299-016-1990-2 Text en © The Author(s) 2016 Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made.
spellingShingle Opinion Paper
Sprink, Thorben
Eriksson, Dennis
Schiemann, Joachim
Hartung, Frank
Regulatory hurdles for genome editing: process- vs. product-based approaches in different regulatory contexts
title Regulatory hurdles for genome editing: process- vs. product-based approaches in different regulatory contexts
title_full Regulatory hurdles for genome editing: process- vs. product-based approaches in different regulatory contexts
title_fullStr Regulatory hurdles for genome editing: process- vs. product-based approaches in different regulatory contexts
title_full_unstemmed Regulatory hurdles for genome editing: process- vs. product-based approaches in different regulatory contexts
title_short Regulatory hurdles for genome editing: process- vs. product-based approaches in different regulatory contexts
title_sort regulatory hurdles for genome editing: process- vs. product-based approaches in different regulatory contexts
topic Opinion Paper
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4903111/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27142995
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00299-016-1990-2
work_keys_str_mv AT sprinkthorben regulatoryhurdlesforgenomeeditingprocessvsproductbasedapproachesindifferentregulatorycontexts
AT erikssondennis regulatoryhurdlesforgenomeeditingprocessvsproductbasedapproachesindifferentregulatorycontexts
AT schiemannjoachim regulatoryhurdlesforgenomeeditingprocessvsproductbasedapproachesindifferentregulatorycontexts
AT hartungfrank regulatoryhurdlesforgenomeeditingprocessvsproductbasedapproachesindifferentregulatorycontexts