A Public Resource Compiled by the

Switzerland: Crops / Food

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

Mostly Prohibited

Gene editing regulations are set to loosen, but details will not be finalized until at least 2024.

As Switzerland is not part of the European Union, it has set its own policy and regulations on gene editing. Switzerland has a history of being a very aggressive opponent of biotechnology in all forms of agriculture. 

In 2022, the Swiss parliament eased restrictions on gene edited crops while extending in principle a moratorium for transgenic genetically engineered organisms until the end of 2025, stating that plants developed through gene editing techniques like CRISPR that do not contain transgenes will not be considered genetically modified organisms (GMOs). The stipulation is that there is a clear benefit for farmers, consumers, and the environment over conventional breeding.

Parliament has asked the government to propose details on the use of gene editing and other NBTs on plants and seeds by 2024 with the purpose of approving some new techniques. For now, the GMO law stays intact. Exemptions to GMO restrictions would only be allowed if the plants provide an added value for agriculture, consumers and the environment compared with conventional methods. The current GMO ban does not include limitations on growing crops for research, although research remains limited.

The more flexible approach to gene editing and other New Breeding Techniques (NBTs) was a departure for Switzerland. The parliament first voted for a moratorium on GMOs in 2005, and it has been extended multiple times since. The claimed aim of the law was to “guarantee that genetic engineering serves the welfare of human beings, animals and environment.” Previously, only one experimental GM crop had been grown in Switzerland, at the University of Zurich

Scientific and agricultural groups have expressed opposition to the strict laws regulating genetic engineering of crops. Their concern has grown as gene editing research and experimentation exploded in countries outside of Europe. Agroscope, the Swiss federal body for agriculture research, expressed its frustration with the recent extension of GMO limitations, saying it is a waste of precious time as global food shortages loom’. 

A 2021 poll found that more than 80% of the Swiss support gene editing if it leads to disease-resistant crops and/or reduces pesticide use. More than 70% supported gene edited crops if they reduce global warming, prevent food waste, lower consumer prices or help protect regional markets. 

The Swiss association Varieties for Tomorrow was formed in 2021 in a stated attempt to lobby the government to liberalize the regulation of NBTs. It includes the label organization IP-Suisse, Swiss Consumer Forum, seed company Delley Samen und Pflanzen AG and the agricultural cooperative Fenaco. 

In October 2022, the Federal Ethics Commission for Non-Human Biotechnology said techniques like CRISPR would likely have a limited impact on alleviating the effects of climate change. The commission, a long-time opponent of crop biotechnology, urged that Switzerland should instead focus on reducing greenhouse emissions and water usage of agriculture. An alliance of food retailers and farmers, called ‘Varieties for Tomorrow’, expressed its disappointment with the report, calling for regulatory approval for new plant breeding methods by 2024.

Products/Research 

    • Virus-resistant cassava, 2019: Researchers at the Swiss Technical University (ETH) in Zürich are using CRISPR and other technologies to study cassava resistance to geminiviruses.
    • Fungal-resistant Barley, 2019: Researchers at the Swiss Technical University (ETH) in Zürich grow genetically modified barley into which a wheat resistance gene against fungal diseases has been introduced.

Regulatory timeline:

2022: Swiss parliament decided that gene-edited plants with no transgenic material inserted are no longer classified as GMOs.

2021: The 2005 moratorium on GMO agriculture use is extended until 2025.

2019: Experimental release of genetically-modified barley allowed for research purposes.

2005: Switzerland bans the use of GMO in agriculture following a nationwide referendum on the subject.

NGO reaction:

Opposition to GMO usage in Switzerland originates with international organizations such as Greenpeace, which has protested and destroyed genetically-modified crops developed for research purposes. The Swiss Alliance for Gene-Free Agriculture and the Schweiz Allianz Gentechfrei also support the GMO moratorium and want it extended to gene editing, arguing that genetic engineering would “endanger natural agriculture and do great damage to the image of Swiss agriculture.”

Resources:

Updated: 01/31/2023

Click on a country (eg. Brazil, US) or region (eg. European Union) below to find which agriculture products and processes are approved or in development and their regulatory status. The regulations on genetically engineered crops and animals are emerging out of the regulatory landscape developed for transgenic GMOs.

World single states political map

European Union

European Union

Switzerland

Switzerland

Brazil

New Zealand

New Zealand

United States

United States

Australia

Australia

Canada

China

United Kingdom

United Kingdom

Israel

Argentina

Argentina

Japan

Mexico

Russia

Chile

Uruguay

Paraguay

India

Africa

Ukraine

Southeast Asia

Southeast Asia

Central America

Central America

Colombia

Norway

Ecuador

Cuba

Argentina

Australia

Central America

European Union

New Zealand

Southeast Asia

United Kingdom

United States

Agriculture Gene Editing Index
Compare Regulatory Restrictions Country-to-Country

Gene editing regulations worldwide are evolving. The Gene Editing Index ratings below represent the current status of gene editing regulations and will be updated as new regulations are passed.

Colors and ratings guide
 

Regulation StatusRating
Determined: No Unique Regulations*10
Lightly Regulated8
Proposed: No Unique Regulations†6
Ongoing Research, Regulations In Development5
Highly Regulated4
Mostly Prohibited2
Limited Research, No Clear Regulations1
Prohibited0
Lightly Regulated: Some or all types of gene editing are regulated more strictly than conventional agriculture, but not as strictly as transgenic GMOs.
*Determined: No Unique Regulations: Gene-edited crops that do not incorporate DNA from another species are regulated as conventional plants with no additional restrictions.

†Proposed: No Unique Regulations: Decrees under consideration for gene-edited crops that do not incorporate DNA from another species would no require unique regulations beyond current what is imposed on conventional breeding.

Crops/Food:
Gene editing of plants and food products. Research and development has mostly focused on disease resistance, drought resistance, and increasing yield, but more recent advances have produced low trans-fat oils and high-fiber grains.
Animals:
Gene editing of animals, not including animal research for human drugs and therapies. Fewer gene edited animals have been developed than gene edited crops, but scientists have developed hornless and heat-tolerant cattle and fast-growing tilapia may soon be the first gene edited animal to be consumed.

Rating by Country / Region
Click each column header and arrow to sort the countries / regions

Swipe right/left if all columns aren't visible

Country / RegionFood / CropsAnimalsAg Rating
Ecuador101010
Norway666
Africa555
Japan888
Brazil101010
Canada888
Russia555
Argentina101010
Israel1057.5
Australia888
Switzerland555
China555
US1047
Chile1015.5
New Zealand444
Ukraine111
Central America666
Paraguay101010
Uruguay666
India666
UK222
Mexico111
EU222
Colombia1015.5

Global gene editing regulatory landscape

The regulations on genetically engineered crops and animals are emerging out of the regulatory landscape developed for transgenic GMOs. Regulations across 34 countries where transgenic or gene edited crops and animals are commercially allowed (as of 12/19) are guided in part by two factors:
 
 
Whether the country has ratified the international agreement that took effect in 2003 that aims to ensure the safe handling, transport and use of living modified organisms (LMOs) resulting from biotechnology that may impact biological diversity, also taking into account potential risks to human health. It entered into force for those nations that signed it in 2003. It applies the ‘precautionary approach as contained in the Rio Declaration on Environment and Development. The US, Canada, Australia and Chile and the Russian Federation have not signed the treaty.
 
 
Whether regulations are based on the genetic process used to create the trait (conventional, mutagenesis, transgenesis, gene editing, etc.) or the final product.Transgenic crops and animals (aka GMOs) are product regulated in many countries including the US and Canada, while the EU, India, China and others regulate based on how the product is made. There is almost an equal number of countries with product- and process-based regulations. It’s not clear how much this distinction matters. It’s somewhat true that countries with product-based regulation have more crops approved and the approval process is more streamlined, but there are contradictions. For example, Brazil and Argentina have emerged as GMO super powers using different regulatory concepts, while there is no GMO commercial cultivation in Japan, North Korea, and the Russian Federation, which employ product-based regulations. How this will effect gene editing regulations is also unclear. For example, Japan, which has no commercialized GMOs, is emerging as a leader in the introduction of gene edited crops.
Agricultural Landscape
Share via

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.