Safe or Sorry - Precautionary Principle in the Biosafety Protocol

Greenpeace International, January 2000

The use of the precautionary principle as the basis for decision-making about genetically modified organisms (GMOs) is one of the most fundamental issues which will need to be agreed on at the Biosafety Protocol negotiations.

As a sound approach to preventing possible environmental damage, the precautionary principle has long been accepted by the international community. In essence, its "better safe than sorry" concept allows for action to be taken to prevent potential harm, even where there is no absolute proof the harm will occur or of the cause of the harm.

The use of the precautionary principle is especially important in the case of GMOs, given the lack of scientific certainty or consensus about their impacts on ecosystems and human health.

Some countries, particularly those anxious to support the biotech industry, such as Canada, USA, and Australia, claim that relying on scientific principles is sufficient.

However the majority of countries from Africa, Asia and Latin America favour the precautionary principle because of the unknown impacts of GMOs in ecosystems and food. The European Union applies the precautionary principle in decision-making on GMOs inside the EU. It is for this reason that a de facto moratorium on new authorisations of GMOs in the EU was introduced in June 1999.

Already, Norway, Austria and Luxembourg have applied the precautionary principle to one genetically engineered crop - Novartis’ genetically engineered maize. They have banned it on two different counts: the impacts of the pesticide gene on biodiversity and the impacts of the antibiotic resistance gene on human health.

Novartis’ Bt maize has been manipulated to be tolerant to the herbicide Basta. A synthetic version of a gene from the soil bacteria Bacillus thuringiensis (Bt) has been added to make the maize produce its own insecticide against the European Corn Borer. It also carries a resistance gene against a group of antibiotics widely used in human and animal medicines, including ampicillin.

Scientific findings (1) have revealed that genetically modified Bt-maize is likely to have adverse impacts on non-target species – in this case, the Monarch butterfly was shown to be at risk of increased mortality from feeding off the pollen of the genetically engineered (GE) maize.

Pesticide resistance

Studies have shown since that the Bt-toxin in the maize may even harm species higher up in the food chain. Austria, Luxembourg, and Norway have cited the fact that widespread cultivation is likely to create insect resistance to the environmentally-sound pesticide, Bt--toxin. Norway has argued that, in rendering Bt-spray useless, the Bt-maize would lead to an increase in use of chemical insecticides.

In its summary of the ban, the Norwegian Government said of the maize: "The product can not be seen as a significant contribution neither to social benefit nor a sustainable development. Ethically speaking, there is no evidence of benefits that would outweigh the health risk attached to the product. Hence marketing of the maize is considered not to be in accordance with the precautionary principle."

Antibiotic resistant marker genes

Norway, Austria and Luxembourg have all referred to the threat of the spread of antibiotic resistance in their justifications for their bans of Novartis’ GE maize.

In December 1998, the highest court in France, the Conseil d’Etat suspended French authorisation of the growing of Novartis’ maize. The court considered the Novartis dossier incomplete as it did not contain information which would allow assessment of the long term effects on human health of the antibiotic resistance gene in the maize. The Conseil said this lack of information required, and justified, precautionary action and the immediate suspension of the growing permit. The case is currently being considered by the European Court of Justice. The final outcome is expected this year.

The Swiss federal agency for the environment, forests and landscape refused in April 1999 field trials to take place of GE potato on the basis of concern about risks of the antibiotic resistance marker gene in the potato.

Greenpeace demands:

• The precautionary principle should be the overriding basis for all decisions and activities relating to GMOs in the Biosafety Protocol.
  
• Parties must be allowed to ban imports of GMOs if they are not convinced that GMOs are safe for the environment or human health, or will have adverse socio-economic consequences on the practices of local communities whose lifestyles represent a sustainable use of biodiversity.
  
• The Protocol must contain rules to allow global bans and phase outs of specific GMOs, or gene constructs used in GMOs.
  
• The Protocol should prohibit any releases of GMOs into Centres of Diversity.

References:

(1) Reported in the journal Nature 399, 214, 20 May 1999 "Transgenic pollen harms monarch larvae".

top / home