Guest Commentary – The Changing Landscape of GMO Policy in the EU
By Nini Gu, Staff Writer, Science and Technology, Chicago Policy Review
While genetically modified organisms (GMOs) are a controversial issue in many parts of the world, there is little consensus on the proper regulation of their production and distribution. GMO policy not only varies from country to country, but often between jurisdictions within a single state. In the European Union (EU), the lack of consistency among member states, and even within each state’s constituent regions, underscores the EU’s internal conflicts over agro-biotechnology politics. Understanding the process by which GMO policy has been formed in the EU may shed light on its future policy trajectory in the EU and other regions of the world.
In a recent study, authors Jale Tosun and Susumu Shikano research how different EU regions decided to adopt the Florence Charter. Introduced in 2005, signatories of the charter are designated members of the European Network of GMO-Free Regions, which sets guiding principles for the network of GMO-free regions, and serves as an informal device for signatories to express commitment to GMO-free agriculture.
This study suggests that “policy diffusion” has led different regions to adopt anti-GMO regulations. Policy diffusion, in this context, occurs through four key mechanisms: learning from the success of early adopters, economic competition, imitation to increase social legitimacy, and coercion by a more dominant authority, such as a national government.
Between 2003 and 2014, the number of declared GMO-free EU regions increased from 11 to 95. However, most newly added regions were from countries that already had a signatory region before 2003. To analyze years before 2003, the signatories of the “Brussels Declaration on the Coexistence of GM Crops with Traditional and Organic Farming,” a document that preceded the Florence Charter, but with similar goals to promote GMO-“freeness” within member regions, are used. These pre-Florence signatories include Austria, France, Germany, Greece, Italy, Spain, and the United Kingdom. This suggests that more recent adoptions of GMO-freeness occurred within countries where at least one GMO-free region already existed.
The main diffusion mechanism of GMO-freeness in the EU during this period is “learning” from other early adopters. The researchers find a significant positive correlation implying a regional influence of adopting the charter. As the number of regions within a country signing the charter in the previous year increases, so does the likelihood that a new region will sign. The authors speculate that this effect may be due to the perception that “success” for early adopters of a policy is its broad implementation and acceptance, hence success increases as more regions join. This outcome highlights the importance of having successful early adopters if a policy is to be widely embraced.
There is also some evidence that regional GMO-freeness can be influenced by national policy, although not in the direction that the researchers had originally anticipated. Their original hypothesis was that a region’s likelihood of becoming GMO-free would rise if there was no ban already in place at the national level. In these instances, they predicted that a region would sign the Florence Charter as a means to protest national policy. However, observed data refute this original hypothesis—more regions become GMO-free in support of existing national bans, rather than in protest of the absence of national GMO bans.
Additionally, the researchers find that the expansion of GMO-freeness within EU member states occurs predominantly at an intra-state, rather than inter-state, level. Despite the substantial proliferation of GMO-free regions since 2003, the number of EU states that have signed the Florence Charter has remained generally constant. More regions are becoming GMO-free within these states. Regional clusters exert limited influence on the EU’s multi-level polity, where member states are still the key political players. Thus, an understanding is needed of the upward diffusion of regional GMO policy to the state level. The future of the EU’s policy on agro-biotechnology will be critical to defining global agricultural trade relations, as well as the environmental, health, and ethical tenets of GMO usage.
References:
Tosun, Jale, and Susumu Shikano. “GMO-Free Regions in Europe: An Analysis of Diffusion Patterns,” Journal of Risk Research 2015.
About
The Global Food and Agriculture Program aims to inform the development of US policy on global agricultural development and food security by raising awareness and providing resources, information, and policy analysis to the US Administration, Congress, and interested experts and organizations.
The Global Food and Agriculture Program is housed within the Chicago Council on Global Affairs, an independent, nonpartisan organization that provides insight – and influences the public discourse – on critical global issues. The Council on Global Affairs convenes leading global voices and conducts independent research to bring clarity and offer solutions to challenges and opportunities across the globe. The Council is committed to engaging the public and raising global awareness of issues that transcend borders and transform how people, business, and governments engage the world.
Support for the Global Food and Agriculture Program is generously provided by the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation.
Blogroll
1,000 Days Blog, 1,000 Days
Africa Can End Poverty, World Bank
Agrilinks Blog
Bread Blog, Bread for the World
Can We Feed the World Blog, Agriculture for Impact
Concern Blogs, Concern Worldwide
Institute Insights, Bread for the World Institute
End Poverty in South Asia, World Bank
Global Development Blog, Center for Global Development
The Global Food Banking Network
Harvest 2050, Global Harvest Initiative
The Hunger and Undernutrition Blog, Humanitas Global Development
International Food Policy Research Institute News, IFPRI
International Maize and Wheat Improvement Center Blog, CIMMYT
ONE Blog, ONE Campaign
One Acre Fund Blog, One Acre Fund
Overseas Development Institute Blog, Overseas Development Institute
Oxfam America Blog, Oxfam America
Preventing Postharvest Loss, ADM Institute
Sense & Sustainability Blog, Sense & Sustainability
WFP USA Blog, World Food Program USA
Archive
Guest Commentary – Designing Common Ground: Progressive Partnerships that Connect Smallholder Farmers
Matt Shakhovskoy of the Initiative for Smallholder Finance on developing progressive partnerships to address global food insecurity.
Guest Commentary – How Clocks Helped Grow Half a Million Tons of Food
Emily Hillenbrand of CARE USA on effective programming to divide household burdens equally among genders and increase female agricultural productivity.
Guest Commentary – Multisectoral Partnerships Created to Respond to Global Food and Nutrition Security Challenge
As part of our Food-Secure Future series, the ACRE Africa team discusses partnerships that are helping to secure progress in global agricultural development.
A Food-Secure Future: G7 and G20 Action on Agriculture and Food
The latest post in our Food-Secure Future series highlights the role of the G7 and the G20 in promoting global food security and agricultural development.
Big Ideas and Emerging Innovations
Highlighting approaches, technologies, and ideas that have the potential to radically advance global food security.
Guest Commentary – Elevating the Smallholder Voice and Making Aid more Accountable for Improved Food and Nutrition Security
Anne Wanlund of Gardens for Health International on accountability and transparency in smallholder agriculture.
Guest Commentary – 3 Things You Should Know about Malnutrition in Mozambique
Beatrice Montesi on her observations of the malnutrition situation in Mozambique.
Guest Commentary – Agricultural Production Should Focus on Food Quality and Nutrition alongside Quantity and Yield
His Excellency John A. Kufuor on refocusing the food system on diet quality and nutrition.
Guest Commentary – Holding World Leaders to Account to End Malnutrition
Lucy Sullivan of 1,000 Days on the need for greater accountability in global nutrition efforts.
Guest Commentary – Private Sector Intervention in Global Food Security
Alaa Murabit on the role of private sector and government in achieving global food security.
A Food-Secure Future: African Accountability to Food Security and Agricultural Development
The latest post in our Food-Secure Future series discusses the structures that are encouraging increased accountability to food security and agricultural development across the African continent.
She Succeeds, We Succeed: Breaking Down the Legal Barriers to Girls’ and Women’s Empowerment
Ahead of International Women's Day, the She Succeeds blog series explores how to break down the legal barriers to girls' and women's empowerment, from lack of legal ID to land tenure and ending child marriage.
Big Ideas and Emerging Innovations
Highlighting approaches, technologies, and ideas that have the potential to radically advance global food security.
Guest Commentary – In Africa, Expecting More from Agriculture than Food Security
As part of our Food-Secure Future series, Agnes Kalibata of AGRA discusses economic opportunity is the driver of agricultural development.
Guest Commentary – The Agribusiness Case for Climate Leadership
As part of our Food-Secure Future series, Dr. Margaret Zeigler of Global Harvest Initiative discusses ways in which agribusinesses can engage in sustainable practices.
