Cargando…

Is it only the regulatory status? Broadening the debate on cisgenic plants

In current debates on emerging technologies for plant breeding in Europe, much attention has been given to the regulatory status of these techniques and their public acceptance. At present, both genetically modified plants with cisgenic approaches—using genes from crossable species—as well as transg...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: van Hove, Lilian, Gillund, Frøydis
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Springer Berlin Heidelberg 2017
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5487859/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28680789
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12302-017-0120-2
_version_ 1783246534131843072
author van Hove, Lilian
Gillund, Frøydis
author_facet van Hove, Lilian
Gillund, Frøydis
author_sort van Hove, Lilian
collection PubMed
description In current debates on emerging technologies for plant breeding in Europe, much attention has been given to the regulatory status of these techniques and their public acceptance. At present, both genetically modified plants with cisgenic approaches—using genes from crossable species—as well as transgenic approaches—using genes from different species—fall under GMO regulation in the EU and both are mandatorily labelled as GMOs. Researchers involved in the early development of cisgenic GM plants convey the message that the potential use and acceptance of cisgenic approaches will be seriously hindered if GMO regulations are not adjusted. Although the similar treatment and labelling of transgenic and cisgenic plants may be a legitimate concern for the marketability of a cisgenic GM plant, there are concerns around their commercialization that reach beyond the current focus on (de)regulation. In this paper, we will use the development of the cisgenic GM potato that aims to overcome ‘late blight’—the most devastating potato disease worldwide—as a case to argue that it is important to recognize, reflect and respond to broader concerns than the dominant focus on the regulatory ‘burden’ and consumer acceptance. Based on insights we gained from discussing this case with diverse stakeholders within the agricultural sector and potato production in Norway during a series of workshops, we elaborate on additional issues such as the (technical) solution offered; different understandings of the late blight problem; the durability of the potato plant resistance; and patenting and ownership. Hence, this paper contributes to empirical knowledge on stakeholder perspectives on emerging plant breeding technologies, underscoring the importance to broaden the scope of the debate on the opportunities and challenges of agricultural biotechnologies, such as cisgenic GM plants. The paper offers policy-relevant input to ongoing efforts to broaden the scope of risk assessments of agricultural biotechnologies. We aim to contribute to the recognition of the complex socio-ecological, legal and political dimensions in which these technological developments are entangled as a means to acknowledge, discuss and respond to these concerns and thereby contribute to more comprehensive and responsible developments within agricultural biotechnology.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-5487859
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2017
publisher Springer Berlin Heidelberg
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-54878592017-07-03 Is it only the regulatory status? Broadening the debate on cisgenic plants van Hove, Lilian Gillund, Frøydis Environ Sci Eur Discussion In current debates on emerging technologies for plant breeding in Europe, much attention has been given to the regulatory status of these techniques and their public acceptance. At present, both genetically modified plants with cisgenic approaches—using genes from crossable species—as well as transgenic approaches—using genes from different species—fall under GMO regulation in the EU and both are mandatorily labelled as GMOs. Researchers involved in the early development of cisgenic GM plants convey the message that the potential use and acceptance of cisgenic approaches will be seriously hindered if GMO regulations are not adjusted. Although the similar treatment and labelling of transgenic and cisgenic plants may be a legitimate concern for the marketability of a cisgenic GM plant, there are concerns around their commercialization that reach beyond the current focus on (de)regulation. In this paper, we will use the development of the cisgenic GM potato that aims to overcome ‘late blight’—the most devastating potato disease worldwide—as a case to argue that it is important to recognize, reflect and respond to broader concerns than the dominant focus on the regulatory ‘burden’ and consumer acceptance. Based on insights we gained from discussing this case with diverse stakeholders within the agricultural sector and potato production in Norway during a series of workshops, we elaborate on additional issues such as the (technical) solution offered; different understandings of the late blight problem; the durability of the potato plant resistance; and patenting and ownership. Hence, this paper contributes to empirical knowledge on stakeholder perspectives on emerging plant breeding technologies, underscoring the importance to broaden the scope of the debate on the opportunities and challenges of agricultural biotechnologies, such as cisgenic GM plants. The paper offers policy-relevant input to ongoing efforts to broaden the scope of risk assessments of agricultural biotechnologies. We aim to contribute to the recognition of the complex socio-ecological, legal and political dimensions in which these technological developments are entangled as a means to acknowledge, discuss and respond to these concerns and thereby contribute to more comprehensive and responsible developments within agricultural biotechnology. Springer Berlin Heidelberg 2017-06-26 2017 /pmc/articles/PMC5487859/ /pubmed/28680789 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12302-017-0120-2 Text en © The Author(s) 2017 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 Discussion
van Hove, Lilian
Gillund, Frøydis
Is it only the regulatory status? Broadening the debate on cisgenic plants
title Is it only the regulatory status? Broadening the debate on cisgenic plants
title_full Is it only the regulatory status? Broadening the debate on cisgenic plants
title_fullStr Is it only the regulatory status? Broadening the debate on cisgenic plants
title_full_unstemmed Is it only the regulatory status? Broadening the debate on cisgenic plants
title_short Is it only the regulatory status? Broadening the debate on cisgenic plants
title_sort is it only the regulatory status? broadening the debate on cisgenic plants
topic Discussion
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5487859/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28680789
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12302-017-0120-2
work_keys_str_mv AT vanhovelilian isitonlytheregulatorystatusbroadeningthedebateoncisgenicplants
AT gillundfrøydis isitonlytheregulatorystatusbroadeningthedebateoncisgenicplants