And the findings and opinions are fervently divided. Maybe you have read articles on the Internet about the countries where GMOs are banned, and countries that use GMOs in their seeds or food production.
Like everything else surrounding the GMO debate, there are no simple answers. Most countries or parts of them have moved between banning some GMOs for a specified time, letting some GMOs in after much research, and limiting others altogether. The research is changing and is challenging to keep up with.
In the European Union, a European Commission rule was passed that gave countries in the European Union the option to opt-out of growing genetically modified crops. In the realm of GMOs in consumer food products, the EU has specific regulations requiring the labeling of GMOs in consumer foods, something the United States will begin to implement as well in January Around the world, countries continue to debate GMO use.
In , Russia imposed a full ban on growing or producing food using genetically modified plants or animals. This resulted from a year moratorium placed on GMOs in so more experiments, tests and new methods of research could be developed. We should stop it from spreading. Some countries that have not banned GMOs have restrictions on them, or have a temporary ban until more research is done. As of now, the country prohibits the production of GMOs. The ban on GMOs in the country has helped to support the 2.
Photo by The Matter of Food on Unsplash. If a country bans GMOs, does that really mean they are fully banned? Not always. As stated above, countries like Peru, Zimbabwe, and Russia have all established temporary bans at one time or another. These do not guarantee that GMOs stay out of a country permanently, but only until there is more research done.
In addition, governments will attempt an authorization for specific types of GM seeds. Ultimately the president of the EU will make the decision, but even if it gets approved, countries can use the opt-out to prevent the GMOs from being grown in their territory. This represents a 5. Recently, a number of developing countries have allowed cultivation of GMOs, often on a case-by-case basis. The five major biotech crops planted at more than 1 million hectares are soybeans On the flipside, there are dozens of nations that prohibit the cultivation of GMO crops, though estimates vary as regulations change.
Russia is the most populous country to ban both the cultivation and importation of GMO crops. In , Russia banned the importation of biotech crops, and officially banned their cultivation, with an exception allowed for scientific research. In , Russia reversed the importation ban on soy, and has funded research on the development of gene-edited foods within its borders. EU regulations give individual countries the right to block farmers from growing GMO crops. Using this opt-out process, 19 members, including Germany and France, voted in late to prohibit the cultivation of eight new biotech crops awaiting approval from regulators.
The EU is awaiting council and committee decisions on the use of genetically engineered crops possibly including transgenics and gene editing. Every EU nation imports them. More than 30 million tons of biotech corn and soy for livestock feed are imported each year, making Europe the largest regional consumer of GMOs in the world. When nations ban the importation or cultivation of GMO products, such moves are not generally driven by science, as the independent science organizations in every major country have come out with public statements that GM products are safe.
The situation in the European Union confirms how divisive and political this issue has become. The EU has witnessed numerous skirmishes between scientists and politically based opposition. Scottish leaders, for example, admitted that their decision to opt out of GMO cultivation was based on marketing concerns, rather than science.
Bans almost always run counter to the advice of scientists and agricultural experts in the nations where they are implemented. Participate Newsletter Donate. GLP Annual Report. The GLP is committed to full transparency. Download our Annual Report. GLP Annual Reports. Global Gene Editing Regulation Tracker. This GLP project maps contributions by foundations to anti-biotech activists and compares it to pro-GMO industry spending.
Where are GMO crops and animals approved and banned? If the Americans like to eat GMO products, let them eat it then. We don't need to do that; we have enough space and opportunities to produce organic food. At a Glance Genetically modified crops are currently grown in 29 nations around the world, while dozens ban farmers from planting GMO crops.
Science and Politics. Click here to view full-size image. Imports banned. Australia: cultivation prohibited in Tasmania and Kangaroo island. Imports allowed. Austria: Cultivation prohibited. Azerbaijan: Cultivation banned. Belize: Cultivation banned. Bhutan: Cultivation banned. Bosnia and Herzegovina: Cultivation banned. Regarding quantitative data on attitudes towards GMOs, we drew on the results of a set of surveys, particularly the Eurobarometer surveys organized and supervised by European Commission , which have been carried out several times in the 15 EU countries.
The IFIC surveys enabled a follow-up of opinion several years in a row because their surveys asked the same questions. With the examples of genetic modification proposed in the IFIC questionnaire, people showed more propensity to buy GM foods than reluctance, but that attitude declined a little between and The belief that biotechnology would be beneficial also diminished between and , particularly in , but tended to stabilize in and In the EU, Eurobarometer surveys reveal growing skepticism regarding biotechnology.
The most recent Eurobarometer survey on biotechnology was taken in spring , on a sample of approximately 16, people. Its results showed a high level of mistrust of GMOs. Certain variations appeared; variations according to typical socio-demographic criteria i. Many risks or negative effects suspected in a wide field. This paper provides an overview table, which establishes a typology of the risks, fears and reasons for refusal, on the basis of the subjects mentioned repeatedly in public or private debates, and articles and arguments against GMOs.
How negative views emerged and grew. When GMO issues were widely publicized as of late , the confidence in institutions and certain technological advances had decreased. Indeed, public opinion was strongly marked by various issues, especially contaminated blood HIV , Mad Cow disease, asbestos, and so on.
These issues led to strong distrust and caused the public to believe that firms and public authorities sometimes disregarded health risks to protect economic or political interests. Afterwards, debate on GMOs i. Furthermore, a movement grew that criticized excesses of the agricultural and food system when problems of pollution and safety came to the forefront.
More and more often the media and the social debate took on a critical view of GMOs. Thus information about GMOs frequently has been and continues to be critical or negative. The strong influence of associations that focus on risks. Growing attention has been paid to warnings by various organizations and their denunciation campaign against genetic engineering.
In particular, these groups took advantage of new communication technologies. Critics associated the opposition of these NGOs with worthy values: the need for caution when launching new technologies, the environment and public health protection, citizen participation in technological choices, etc. Organizations opposed to GMOs gained legitimacy, whereas companies involved in GM products were often seen as greedy and rapacious. Behavior of other actors that publicized information on GMOs.
Of course, many actors other than opposing organizations are involved in the GMO field, but their respective influence varies widely. Publicity given to denunciation of GMOs has been noteworthy, particularly in a number of media. The media have played a significant part in making GMOs widely known and in highlighting their potential dangers, especially at the end of the s and at the beginning of the s.
0コメント