European leaders have introduced a landmark package of legislative proposals deemed critical to securing the resilience of sustainably farmed food, which has ignited debate among industry stakeholders surrounding its viability. One critical point of contention is the relaxing of regulatory oversight on “new genomic techniques,” such as genetic engineering.

Expedited under the proposed updates to the European Green Deal, genetic engineering is increasingly considered an important catalyst for high-yielding crops that are climate- and pest-resistant, while requiring less fertilizers and pesticides. A softer stance on regulating this science in the EU reflects similar transitions in other markets like the UK.

But organic farming representatives at IFOAM Organics Europe consider the European Commission’s proposal to deregulate new genomic techniques as “misguided, dangerous for European seed autonomy and a distraction from the agroecological solutions needed to move agriculture toward sustainability.”

European organic farming players consider the moves to deregulate gene edited crops as “misguided” and even “dangerous.”Organic sector hits back
On the topic of new deregulated genomic techniques, organic players are directly addressing members of the European Parliament and governments to “act to protect the freedom of farmers and consumers” by actively not buying from genetic engineering.

A perceived threat by members of the organic sector is the “monopolization of genetic resources through patents.”

“Exempting certain new genomic techniques from risk assessment, traceability and labeling is a step backward for biosafety and consumer information, and is unlikely to bring any benefit for sustainability,” argues Jan Plagge, president at IFOAM Organics Europe.

“This proposal is a massive accelerator for a lucrative business model from the biotech and chemical industry. It seems that the European Commission unfortunately followed misleading industry promises and their business interests before closing the dangerous loopholes in the patent rights framework.”

“This is a bad day for the European model of a diverse farming and breeding sector. Now, the organic movement calls on the Council and Parliament to at least maintain traceability for NGTs all along the production chain, a legal basis for measures to ensure co-existence, as well as consumers’ information.”

But the European Commission maintains its stance on the importance of legislation being “up to speed with the evolution of science.” The sentiment ostensibly reflects similar policy shifts abroad, such as the US, which earlier this year greenlighted the first-ever commercial sale of nutritionally boosted mixed leafy greens developed using genome-editing crossbreeding technology.

“This proposal will updat and simplify the current rules, some of which are more than 50-years old,” concludes the European Commission’s statement on the subject.

Soil health in the foreground
Within its package of new measures, the European Commission has decided to launch a new initiative focusing on soil quality monitoring. The proposal, which aims to remedy the degradation of 60% of European soils, will have implications in agriculture.

The push to soften regulation on gene edited foods in Europe reflects similar moves in the US and UK.Copa-Cogeca, a body of European farmers and agri-cooperatives, has openly welcomed this initiative. But the umbrella group concedes that “some specific elements will need to be improved by co-legislators.”

“When it comes to the healthy soil assessment, Copa and Cogeca call for clear distinctions between healthy and unhealthy soils and not hinge upon an arbitrary indicator,” states the group.

“Additionally, it is of utmost importance that the certification of healthy soils has an added value component to farmers on the ground and that sustainable soil management practices remain open to include all farming models.”

The farming coalition believes one weak point of the proposal is on land take. “It is unfortunate that the provision in the law does not include strong targets for member states to ensure the constant removal of agricultural and forestry land by land take and soil sealing. It would have been preferable that this law had been stronger on this issue,” it says.

Reducing food waste for a “triple win”
Food waste is another touchpoint of the European Green Deal. Nearly 59 million metric tons of food (131 kg/inhabitant) are wasted in the EU each year, with an estimated market value of €132 billion (US$143.4 billion), flags the Commission.

“Over half of food waste (53%) is generated by households, followed by the processing and manufacturing sector (20%),” it outlines.

“Fighting food waste is a triple win: It saves food for human consumption and thereby contributes to food security. It helps companies and consumers to save money, and it lowers the environmental impact of food production and consumption.”

To accelerate the EU’s progress, the Commission proposes that, by 2030, member states reduce food waste by 10% in processing and manufacturing and by 30% (per capita) jointly at retail and consumption, including restaurants, food services and households.

All the above mentioned proposals will now be discussed by the European Parliament and the Council in its ordinary legislative procedure.