The EU takes a very strict approach to regulating gene-edited animals that effectively favors banning their introduction. In opposition to scientific recommendations, the European Court of Justice (ECJ) ruled in 2018 that gene editing shall be regulated under the 2001 GMO Directive that heavily restricts transgenic organisms created using genes from another species, even though […]
European Union: Animals Read More »
Brazil is currently a global leader in agricultural biotechnology, rivaling the United States in both total approved products and cultivated acreage. It is the most aggressive adopter of the “product-based” regulatory approach, having approved more than 140 genetically modified (GM) events, a single insertion or edit of a gene into a specific crop’s genome, for
Brazil: Crops / Food Read More »
Canada takes a unique stance on gene editing by regulating any products that contain novel traits, including gene edited animals, regardless of the process (e.g. conventional breeding, mutagenesis, transgenesis or gene editing) used to develop the product. Any animals that contain novel traits require environmental and safety assessments to be approved. Most mutagenic products currently
All gene editing techniques are considered genetic modification and are tightly regulated. New Zealand has adopted a wait-and-see-approach with regard to updating regulations to address gene editing, monitoring how other countries, especially those New Zealand exports to, decide to regulate. No gene edited crops or food are currently grown commercially in New Zealand and no
New Zealand: Crops / Food Read More »
All gene editing techniques are considered genetic modification and are tightly regulated. New Zealand has adopted a wait-and-see-approach with regard to updating regulations to address gene editing, monitoring how other countries, especially those New Zealand exports to, decide to regulate. Gene edited animals are regulated by the Environmental Protection Authority (EPA), which oversees the development
New Zealand: Animals Read More »
Regulatory approaches to gene editing are broadly divided into those that focus on the final product and those that are more concerned with the process. Like Europe, Australia had regulated all genetically engineered crops, including both transgenic and cisgenic/ gene-edited plants, based on the process used to develop gene-edited products, instead of the characteristics of
Australia: Crops / Food Read More »
While genetically engineered crops are regulated by the USDA, which is liberalizing its oversight of gene editing, animal biotechnology is overseen by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA). In contrast to the oversight of genetically engineered crops, GE animals, both transgenic and gene edited, are regulated based on the process of alterations rather than on
United States: Animals Read More »
Food produced using new breeding techniques (NBTs), including CRISPR gene editing, are held to similar standards as conventional foods. Plants produced through the use of NBTs are regulated based on the end product, not the means of creating them. Oversight of gene-editing technology is jointly managed by the U.S. Department of Agriculture, the Food and
United States: Crops / Food Read More »
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. Changes introduced in January 2018 determined that most NBTs should not be regulated as transgenic GMOs because no genes are inserted from other (e.g. foreign) species. Each product is evaluated
For more than two decades, the European Union was the global fortress of anti-GMO sentiment, governed by a “precautionary principle” that prioritized absolute safety over technological innovation. This era was defined by the 2001 GMO Directive, a rigid set of rules that made the commercialization of biotech crops nearly impossible, although the EU did import
European Union: Crops / Food Read More »
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.