According to IFOAM Organics Europe, the latest draft compromise text on the legislative proposal on so-called “New Genomic Techniques” (NGTs) presented to Member States on 19 February 2025 has severe deficiencies with worrisome consequences for European breeders, farmers, and the food industry. The current draft text would leave European breeders and farmers unprotected from patent claims and the agriculture and food industry with insufficient means to safeguard their entrepreneurial freedom.
BRUSSELS, 27 FEBRUARY 2025
__________
“After more than 18 months of constricted discussions in the Council, we are now faced with a new text that ignores the repeated and clear demands of the European food and farming sector, breeders, environmental organizations, and citizens”, said Jan Plagge, president of IFOAM Organics Europe.
He continues: “We are left with question marks about what happened to the encouraging ambitions in the Council to protect the European breeding sector from the threat of patent protections. In the very least, patent claims should not extend to genetic material that can also be obtained by conventional breeding or that is occurring in nature, and the text does not even clarify this aspect. Legal experts have made it clear that it is possible to limit the scope of patents on plants and animals with a targeted modification of the Biotech Directive 98/44”.
A recent white paper on mitigating the impact of patents on plants obtained from NGTs was published on 27.01.2025 by the Humboldt University of Berlin which proposes concrete amendment suggestions to Directive 98/44 that could potentially address the issue of patent scope.
“Besides patents, there are a number of other outstanding issues that policymakers need to urgently address. This is the only way to safeguard the entrepreneurial freedom of businesses and food sovereignty in the European Union. Namely, the European Parliament has rightfully decided to introduce traceability in their position to protect the freedom of choice of the farming and food sector. The Council should follow suit and additionally protect the integrity of organic and conventional GMO-free production by securing their national sovereignty and right to introduce national coexistence measures”, pointed Plagge.
Organic producers count on Member States in the Council to secure their right to take traceability and national coexistence measures to ensure the freedom of farmers, food producers and consumers not to use genetic engineering techniques.
___________
Resolution from the European organic food and farming movement, adopted at IFOAM
Organics Europe General Assembly on 21.06.2023.
The European organic agricultural movement re-affirms its position that the organic production process should
remain free of Genetically Modified Organisms (GMOs) in the future, including GMOs derived from New Genomic
Techniques (NGTs). Organic breeders, farmers, processors, certifiers, traders, and retailers demand the
preservation of their freedom of choice to remain GMO-free. To that end, the principle of labelling and
traceability enshrined in the current legislation, which allows for the identification of GMOs throughout the
supply chain, must be maintained and applied to all NGTs.
Notably, genetic engineering is used to legitimise patents on seeds and animals. Exempting genetic material
protected by a patent from traceability would expose all operators in the food supply chain to significant legal
uncertainty as to what they can or cannot do with the plants and animals they work with due to patent
infringement concerns. The increasing number of patents on specific traits and genetic material is a threat to the
innovative European breeding model, which relies on lighter forms of intellectual property rights that allow for
the circulation of genetic material. This would lead to a harmful concentration and corporate control in the seed
sector connected with business models from the chemical industry.
The European Green Deal, the Farm to Fork, and the EU Biodiversity Strategies rightfully put organic farming at
the core of a transition to sustainable food systems, with a target to expand European agricultural land under
organic production to 25%. This is a welcome and necessary recognition of the environmental benefits of organic
farming, for less dependency on inputs for farmers, and a resilient food supply for our society.
The organic movement strongly condemns the attacks against the Farm to Fork Strategy and the misleading
claims that reducing the use of synthetic pesticides and restoring nature would not allow Europe to ensure its
food security. With smart changes in land use and agroecological innovation, combined with a shift in diets and
types of production, European farmers can produce sufficient food while safeguarding natural resources.
A healthy environment with a prospering flora and fauna above and below the soil is one of humanity’s most
precious goods and the bedrock of our food system. We are its beneficiaries, tasked with responsible stewardship
towards nature. This also includes the application of the precautionary principle, and the principle of care, health,
ecology, and fairness rooted in holistic, agroecological approaches.
To make our food systems truly sustainable, we need to transition away from input-intensive, short-term fixes,
which include the promotion of specific technologies with unproven benefits and potential unintended effects
and risks. Genetic engineering with its currently still empty sustainability promises exhibits a narrow, and short-
term view of the complex challenges of food systems. A focus on specific genes or traits does not account for the
importance of interactions between crops with their environment and geophysical properties, including soil
health, and symbiotic relationship with other species. This understanding of agricultural systems is not the type
of innovation that Europe so desperately needs in the face of various environmental challenges.
Contrarily, organic farming consistently delivers resilient agroecological systems, taking into account the
complexity of interactions in nature. Organic agriculture has proven benefits for biodiversity, climate change
mitigation, animal welfare, and many other environmental and social challenges. The organic movement has
been for decades a main driver for nature-based regenerative systems of agroecological innovation. The EU has
a leading position in the whole world in the development of an organic agri-food system, with policies enabling
competitive practices for organic and GMO-free feed and food. Following the road of GMO exporting countries
would entail losing this leading position in organic production and agroecological innovation.
Organic operators want to continue to fulfil their commitment towards consumers to guarantee a GM-free
production process. Consumers are largely and rightfully still sceptical of the benefits of new GMOs. A potential
deregulation of certain NGTs would threaten consumers’ confidence in the integrity of the organic food supply
chain, and taking away consumers’ right to information on the use of NGTs would undermine confidence in the
EU decision-making process.
The Organic movement has severe concerns about the potential exemption from the EU legal framework on
GMOs of so-called “conventional-like” NGT crops, which would exempt them from identification and traceability.
This would de facto, legally speaking allow the use of these NGTs in organic production, without providing legal
and technical means to identify these products. This poses a threat to the right and freedom to farm without
these techniques and to the integrity of organic products.
Importantly, the cumbersome burden of ensuring GM-free production must not fall on operators who do not
wish to use NGTs, as this would significantly hinder the development of organic agriculture in the European Union.
European Union policies should focus on resilient agroecology with a systemic understanding of sustainability.
Promises of expected benefits of NGTs do not justify watering down the successful EU precautionary principle
and EU standards on environmental protection and farmer and consumers’ choice.
Thus, the organic movement calls for the maintenance of a system of identification and traceability, so that
organic and conventional operators have the right and freedom to continue producing GM-free throughout the
entire supply chain.
Source of News:
- European organic movement’s resolution on new GMOs
- White Paper on mitigating the impact of patents on plants obtained from NGTs
https://www.organicseurope.bio/content/uploads/2023/06/6_IFOAMEU_GA2023_Resolution_NGTs.pdf?dd
- Joint letter:
Protect the business of small and medium size breeders, farmers, and the organic and non GMO sectors in the EU - Global organic movement position paper on Compatibility of breeding techniques in organic systems
https://my.organicseurope.bio/civicrm/?civiwp=CiviCRM&q=civicrm/mailing/url&u=40735&qid=1879719
Click to see the full page of Infographic >>
_______________________
Source: IFOAM Organics Europe
IFOAM Organics Europe is the European umbrella organization for organic food and farming. With almost 200 members in 34 European countries, our work spans the entire organic food chain and beyond: from farmers and processors organizations, retailers, certifiers, consultants, traders and researchers to environmental and consumer advocacy bodies.
Main Photo source: Pexels.com
Infographics source: IFOAM Organics Europe
