INTERNATIONAL REGULATION AND STANDARDS FOR FOODS DERIVED FROM BIOTECHNOLOGY
Executive Summary
Background:
In July 1999, the Codex Alimentarius Commission, the international food standards body, agreed to establish an international Ad Hoc Intergovernmental Task Force on foods derived from biotechnology (hereafter referred to as the Task Force). The Task Force will be chaired and hosted by Japan. The Task Force aims to develop standards, guidelines or recommendations, as appropriate, for foods derived from biotechnology or traits introduced into foods by biotechnology, on the basis of scientific evidence, risk analysis and having regard, where appropriate, to other legitimate factors relevant to the health of consumers and the promotion of fair practices in the food trade.
Briefing Guideline
The statutes of Codex restrict its work to the development of food standards, codes of practice and guidelines.
Codex deals specifically with the effects on people of the food they consume, but not with wider issues such as the effects of agricultural production on the environment.
Request for views
MAF sought the views of interested parties on the criteria and principles that should form the basis of any international standards or guidelines in this area.
Process
Martech Consulting Group was invited to facilitate two workshops using its Stakeholder Needs Analysis Programme technique (SNAP). This paper provides background information on some of the key issues pertinent to the development of international standards for foods derived from biotechnology.
This document
This document captures
- the close to 500 observations raised by
- 34 participants from three categories
- Consumers
- Producers, Manufacturers, Marketers and Retailers
- Research
- at twin workshops in Auckland and Wellington during February 2000.
- Government representatives sat in as observers in each workshop so as to be able to follow the debate and make first-hand interpretations of issues as they were raised by participants.
Findings – listed in prioritised order
1. Trusted food testing and system (Vote score 70)
At the Auckland workshop, this subject was dominated by Researchers:
- A call for an international consensus conference to set food safety standards which are globally adopted
- Acceptable testing standards
- Food safety – from number of perspectives
Curiously, whilst participants were clear that ‘trust’ was what it was all about, only one observation in the 35 Strategic Importance items under this heading, combining both workshops, included the word ‘trust’:
- Lack of trust in regulatory bodies and Governments Consumers
Trusted testing prior to release was a major heading from the Wellington group with the following two examples illustrating this theme:
- Clear and rigorous testing regime before products can be sold to consumers - Producers / Manufacturers / Marketers / Retailers
- Independent verification that testing is sound - Research
2. Consumer education and participation (Vote score 62)
On this subject, Producers / Manufacturers / Marketers / Retailers had a common stance:
- Individual consumers given the choice over what they eat i.e. labelling
- Giving the consumer the ability to decide
- Science more understandable
- Improved flow of information
But Consumers emphasised one aspect:
- Money to fund impartial information
- Education
- Comprehensive information available
This was different to the stance taken by Research:
- Biotech foods are recognised for their benefits
The following comment probably holds the key to a more balanced understanding of the issues:
- Ability to listen and take on board the differences / work through difference à agreement - Consumers
This view was supported, but expressed differently, by a Research participant:
- Establishment of forum whereby all interested groups could discuss the pros and cons of developments in GM Foods before marketing.
In the Wellington group, who identified the title of Consumer education and participation, the need for balanced listening and the role of farmers producing the foods came out clearly. The following examples came from the Producers / Manufacturers / Marketers / Retailers subgroup:
- Consumers need better understanding of farming – to know what they can ask for
- Acceptance of the general public that biotechnology has a place in NZ society
- All groups involved. Must listen to each other.
- We have some common goals – let’s identify them
- Co-operation of parties is essential
- All views are equally valid
3. Communications and consumer information (Vote score 62)
Researchers offered the following points about ‘Information Resources’:
- Evidence based science for biotech foods is accessible and transparent
- Much expanded databases of composition / allergens / toxic components
The need for a ‘Balanced Role’ by media is summed up in the following two observations:
- Balanced representation of both sides - Consumers
- Consumer confidence enhanced by media co-operation to avoid sensationalism - Research
Under the highest scoring heading of the Wellington Group, Trusted consumer information – including labelling, the following observations from Producers / Manufacturers / Marketers / Retailers are examples of their opinion:
- Consumers understand labelling, and recognise costs associated with such labelling
- Consumers must be able to make an informed choice
- Benefits to and understanding by consumers of the labelling regime outweighs the costs
- Labelling regulations that are practical
- Labelling requirements which include a ‘threshold’ limit
- A realistic labelling regulation
- Accepted audit trail
- Use of range of communication channels – not just labelling
- Acknowledgement of a persons right to freely choose what to eat
- Logical and rational labelling regime – clear regulation
4. International trade impacts (Vote score 32)
Under the heading of Necessity for international co-operation and trade, the following examples came from Wellington participants:
- Recognition that this an international issue that NZ can not deal with alone - Consumers
- Producers / Manufacturers / Marketers / Retailers:
- Clear measurable benefits of technology have been shown since its introduction
- Freer agricultural trade has been key to effective food safety
- International co-operation has underpinned safe food
- New Zealand’s competitiveness in international markets
- Use of biotechnology means NZ is competitive globally
- Regulation protected safety but didn’t add unreasonable cost - Research
5. Risk and return issues (Vote score 32)
Observations under this heading were dominated by Producers / Manufacturers / Marketers / Retailers participants with the following examples:
- Clear identification of risks and return
- Clarity of safety issues in R&D
- Compliance cost must not outweigh benefit
- Commitment to standards which scientifically assess risk
- Regulation and standards based on sound science
- Commitment to research to facilitate risk assessment
- Acceptance of reasonable risk
- Risk is an inherent part of life
- Risk requirement so everybody had confidence in the result
- Net health and economic benefit
- Public acceptance of risk assessment principles
6. Clear regulations (Vote score 32)
The following three different views indicate the spread of view on this subject:
- All organic product labelled and verified by third party - Consumers
- Clear, easily followed regulations limited ambiguity - Producers / Manufacturers / Marketers / Retailers
- Labelling restricted to major issues not comprehensive - Research
7. GM versus organics (Vote score 24)
A number of Consumers, possibly reflecting the make up of the participant group, focussed on a particular stance:
- GE food not required in an organic nation
- No benefit to consumers; GE foods made redundant
- No GE / GMO imports into New Zealand
- No more GE!
- $$s placed into organic systems research / education / tech. transfer
This position is clearly at variance with the following input from a Research participant:
- Acceptance that GM crops per se not at odds with organic movement.
8. Environmental health concerns (Vote score 14)
This heading came out of the Wellington participant group, and the following observations illustrate the diversity of views on this issue:
- Growing realisation that unadulterated (good) food is essential for health - Consumers
- GE is found to have produced super weeds; decimated insects; and exasperated loss of biodiversity - Consumers
- Good health and good environment … good business - Producers / Manufacturers / Marketers / Retailers
- Consumer involvement through whole bio-production chain - Producers / Manufacturers / Marketers / Retailers
- Biotech that showed environmental benefits, improved safety (e.g. reduced allergens), direct and indirect consumer benefits adopted - Research
9. Cultural and related issues (Vote score 10)
This subject polled only one seventh of the top ranking issue, and is well summed up by the following comment:
- Food regulations respect cultural and religious beliefs Research
| © MAF 2000 |  |
|
| MAFnet Help | Important Disclaimer |
Contact for Enquiries
Dr Sharon Adamson
Manager,
Innovation Policy
Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry
PO Box 2526
Wellington
NEW ZEALAND
Phone: +64 4 894 0618
Fax: +64 4 4 894 0741
Contact this person
