A new report by the Breakthrough Institute and the Alliance for Science has shared the economic costs due to the EU’s regulations on new genomic techniques (NGTs) according to a release.
The report titled “The €3 Trillion Cost of Saying No: How the EU Risks Falling Behind in the Bioeconomy Revolution,” examines outdated EU laws, including a 2001 regulatory framework. This framework “classifies gene-edited crops as genetically modified organisms (GMOs)”. This eliminates new economic growth.
The report also looks at the potential growth NGTs could bring to numerous sectors, including agriculture and offers potential economic benefits from 2020 through 2040. It has the potential to add an annual economic opportunity cost of $182 to 356 billion for the EU. More project in the area could make this number closer to 3.2 trillion dollars over a decade.
Biotechnology can potentially increase crop yields, crop stress tolerance, reduction in the need for synthetic fertilizers, reduction in food waste and improved livestock disease resistance. The European Union has been unable to use these advantages due to restrictive regulations. The European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) has said that “NGTs do not introduce new safety risks compared to conventional breeding and established genomic techniques.”
“The EU is falling further behind as countries worldwide continue to pass new regulations that support gene editing technologies, which are a vital part of bio-economy growth,” said Dr Emma Kovak, senior Food and Agriculture analyst at the Breakthrough Institute. “In saying no to scientific innovation, the EU misses out on many benefits, including reduced greenhouse gas emissions from agriculture and food production.”
The report also covers the European Commission’s July 2023 proposals to update NGT regulations and the opposition to these proposals from the green NGOs and political parties.
Impossible Foods, makers of the Impossible Burger, was an example used. Impossible Foods cannot sell its products in the EU because of its cumbersome assessment process.
The report said, “Impossible Foods’ soy leghemoglobin is produced via precision fermentation in genetically modified yeast in an industrial setting. Because Impossible Foods’ final product contains host proteins, it is regulated under EC 1829/2003 legislation on GMOs, meaning that even if the European Food Safety Authority assessment is positive, the decision goes to the European Commission and member states, of which a 55 per cent majority must vote to approve the product.”
The report continued, “The company submitted its dossier for regulatory approval to place the product on the market in October 2019, and the dossier was not validated until late December 2021, after which the process was immediately paused to request more information and remains on hold at the time of writing (July 2023), with the pause expected to last until the end of 2023. Approval is an unlikely prospect, and refusal to approve this more sustainable plant-based product would have a chilling effect on the entire sector, which is impossible to quantify but very real.”
The EU’s regulation have broad reaching impacts. “This report details the high cost of saying no to scientific innovations,” said Dr Sheila Ochugboju, director of the Alliance for Science. “It is also important to consider the impact of the EU’s regulatory decision-making on the Global South, where an overly precautionary approach can hamper efforts to tackle food insecurity and reduce poverty.”
The report also touches on a decision from 2018 made by Court of Justice of the European Union. This decision “subjects organisms modified using NGTs to the EU’s 2001 GMO legislation, a regulation established before precise gene-editing methods like CRISPR.” It highlights that the scientific community has concerns for the harsh stance the EU takes on NGTs.
