Cuba only recently began experimenting with the gene editing of crops, and any approvals may not happen for years. Its gradual embrace of genetic engineering began in 1986, when Fidel Castro founded the Center for Genetic Engineering and Biotechnology (CIGB). In the 1990s, 50 research centers emerged, which were merged in 2012 into the state […]
Cuba: Crops / Food Read More »
Switzerland remains one of Europe’s more cautious jurisdictions on agricultural biotechnology because it classifies all gene-edited plants and animals out of its broader GMO regime as genetically modified organisms (GMOs) under current law. According to the Swiss Expert Committee for Biosafety, the marketing of genetically modified organisms is governed by the Gene Technology Act. In
Switzerland: Crops / Food Read More »
Gene-edited crops that do not contain DNA from another species are regulated as conventionally-bred plants unless they contain foreign DNA. The regulation is based on the Organic Code of the Environment, issued in 2019, that established exemptions from very restrictive GMO regulations. Ecuador’s constitution prohibits the commercial cultivation of genetically modified crops, but the import
Ecuador: Crops / Food Read More »
Gene-edited crops and food are regulated as conventionally-bred plants unless they contain foreign DNA, after a dossier is submitted to determine if they are exempt. In 2018, the Colombian Agricultural Institute (ICA) issued a resolution that established a case-by-case consultation process to determine if a gene-edited product is considered a GMO. The ICA must respond
Colombia: Crops / Food Read More »
Norway has a history of fierce opposition to transgenic biotechnology (GMOs) dating to the early 2000s. Proposed regulations state that gene-edited organisms without foreign genes do not fulfill the definition of transgenic GMOs and should be regulated as conventional. In 2018, the Norwegian Biotechnology Advisory Board proposed a tiered regulatory system in which genetic changes
Norway, which is not a member of the European Union, regulates cisgenic gene-editing and other New Breeding Techniques (NBTs) in the highly restrictive way Europe has regulated transgenically modified crops (GMOs). Many scientists are pressing to modify regulations when no “foreign genes” are involved, but so far, as in the EU, restrictions remain in place.
Norway: Crops / Food Read More »
Colombia has not determined the regulatory status of gene editing in animals. There is little research and no products in development. Products/Research None Regulatory Timeline None NGO Reaction None Additional Resources Genetic Literacy Project’s FAQ on gene editing
Uruguay has no specific regulations for gene edited animals. In 2018, Uruguay and 12 other nations, including Argentina, Australia, Brazil and the US, issued a joint statement to the World Trade Organization supporting relaxed regulations for gene editing, stating that governments should “avoid arbitrary and unjustifiable distinctions” between organisms developed through gene editing and organisms
Gene-edited crops and food are regulated as conventional plants unless they contain foreign DNA, after a dossier is submitted to determine if they are exempt. Gene edited crops are assessed on a case-by-case basis by the National Commission on Agricultural and Forestry Biosafety. In 2018, Paraguay and 12 other nations, including Argentina, Australia, Brazil and the US, issued a
Gene editing is a set of techniques that can be used to precisely modify the DNA of almost any organism. It is being used for applications in human health, gene drives and agriculture. There are numerous gene-editing tools besides CRISPR-Cas 9, which gets most of the attention because it is a comparatively easy tool to use.
Gene editing does not usually involve transgenics – moving ‘foreign’ genes between species. It also refers to a specific technique in contrast to the general term GMO, which is scientifically ambiguous, as genetic modification is a process not a product. Most gene editing involves creating new products by deleting very small segments of DNA (sometimes in agriculture called Site-Directed Nuclease 1 or SDN-1 techniques), which can silence a gene or change a gene’s activity. Countries are evaluating whether or not to regulate this type of gene editing, since it is so similar to natural mutations. The GLP’s Gene Editing Index ratings reflect the regulatory status of SDN-1 techniques, which are the most liberally regulated and will generate most products in the near term.
To develop different products, gene editing can change larger segments of DNA or add DNA from other species (a form of transgenics sometimes in agriculture called SDN-2 or SDN-3 techniques). While many countries are not regulating or lightly regulating SDN-1 techniques, most are moving toward tightly regulating or even restricting SDN-2 and SDN-3.
For more background on the various gene editing SDN techniques, read background articles here and here.