Archives for September 5, 2006

The United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) recently released a report focused on the opportunities and challenges for biotechnology in the next decade:

“WASHINGTON, Aug. 30, 2006— Deputy Agriculture Secretary Chuck Conner announced today that a report about the future of biotechnology is available to the public. Prepared by USDA’s Advisory Committee on Biotechnology and 21st Century Agriculture (AC21), “Opportunities and Challenges in Agricultural Biotechnology: The Decade Ahead” describes the advances in agricultural biotechnology’s first decade and discusses a range of topics related to agricultural biotechnology that may be addressed by the secretary over the next decade.

“We are pleased to get this report and thank those involved for their interest and efforts. This consensus report, from a diverse group of stakeholders who express different perspectives, will be important in helping us understand the evolving landscape for agricultural biotechnology,” said Conner.

The AC21 was established in 2003 to examine how biotechnology is likely to change agriculture and USDA’s work over the long term. The 20-member committee represents a wide spectrum of views and interests and is composed of farmers, technology providers, academics, representatives from the food manufacturing and shipping industries, and representatives from consumer and environmental organizations. The committee meets in public session three to four times per year. The web site for the AC21, which contains all the committee’s reports and information about its meetings, can be accessed through USDA’s biotechnology portal at http://www.usda.gov.

Possibilities

According to the report, some of the ag biotech possibilities over the next ten years could include:
1. Genetically engineered plant varieties that provide improved human nutrition (e.g.,soybeans enriched in omega-3 fatty acids);
2. Products designed for use in improved animal feeds (providing better nutritional balance by increasing the concentration of essential amino acids often deficient in some feed components, increased nutrient density, or more efficient utilization of nutrients such as phosphate that could provide environmental benefits);
3. Crops resistant to drought and other environmental stresses such as salinity;
4. Crops resistant to pests and diseases (e.g., fusarium- resistant wheat; chestnut-blight resistant chestnut; plum pox resistance in stone fruit; various insect resistant crops);
5. Additional crops containing a number of transgenic traits incorporated in the same plant (stacked traits);
6. Crops engineered to produce pharmaceuticals, such as vaccines and antibodies;
7. Crops engineered for particular industrial uses (e.g., crops having improved processing attributes such as increased starch content, producing useful enzymes that can be extracted for downstream industrial processes, or modified to have higher content of an energy-rich starting material such as oil for improved utilization as biofuel); and
8. Transgenic animals for food, or for production of pharmaceuticals or industrial products (e.g., transgenic salmon engineered for increased growth rate to maturity, transgenic goats producing human serum factors in their milk, and pigs producing the enzyme phytase in their saliva for improved nutrient utilization and manure with reduced phosphorus content).

Challenges

AC21 members have diverse views about the appropriate role of plant and animal products derived from modern biotechnology in the food and agricultural marketplace. Members recognize that new products will be entering a world that is very different from the one that existed a decade ago when the first agricultural products of modern biotechnology were
introduced:
1. Many of the “first-generation” transgenic organisms developed in the United States have now been adopted by farmers in other nations, including developing nations;
2. Some of the transgenic plant varieties intended for food use developed over the next few years will likely emerge from the developing world. For example, if transgenic rice varieties (probably insect-resistant
varieties) that have been developed in the developing world (e.g., in China or India) are commercialized, this could have a significant impact on the global genetic engineering debate because large populations of humans will be consuming a staple transgenic whole food;
3. Some of the “next generation” of transgenic varieties and products may need to be produced under identity preservation conditions or require strict segregation from food or feed product streams;
4. Media coverage and public debate have made consumers more aware of genetically engineered products than when the first crops were adopted.
5. Increased awareness along the food and feed chain will continue to influence the acceptance of new products derived from modern biotechnology;
6. Genomic information is being used to enable the development of improved crops and animals through both transgenic and non-transgenic approaches;
7. National regulatory systems for evaluating the safety of new transgenic products are being developed and implemented in many countries around the world, eliminating some uncertainties but, in some cases, complicating the path to market;
8. Many countries now require mandatory labeling for food products derived from modern biotechnology, and some require traceability of those products throughout the food and feed chain. Food manufacturers who do not want to label their products as containing transgenics are sourcing non-transgenic crops, further segmenting the marketplace;
9. U.S. regulations are evolving slowly and many governing statutes were written before modern agricultural biotechnology was developed. That system may not be optimal to meet the needs of producers and consumers.
10.The commercialization of a transgenic plant or animal product is affected by considerations beyond the safety of the product. Technical challenges may arise when turning a beneficial trait into a marketable food. New products must gain acceptance by consumers and trading partners;
11. Sometimes social and ethical concerns may influence decisions about commercialization. For example, the development of transgenic animals may generate, for some people, higher levels of concern than those for plant breeding;
12. Some international agreements specific to modern biotechnology, e.g., the Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety, and standards related to modern biotechnology under Codex Alimentarius, now exist. Additional efforts under these bodies are continuing, but their future outcomes are uncertain;
13. There is an ongoing trade dispute over modern biotechnology-derived products between the EU and a number of complainants, including the United States, nearing a final report from the World Trade Organization;
14. Technology producers, food producers and processors increasingly recognize the global interdependence of markets and the importance of resolving genetic engineering- related issues;
15. With the increased use of genetically engineered organisms, other issues such as testing, liability, coexistence, and intellectual property rights, have emerged.“

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Thanks to Larissa Mullot, Agrifood Awareness Australia Limited for alerting me to the report.