Some of the world’s leading plant breeders share their thoughts on this week’s landmark EU agreement to allow gene-edited fruits and vegetables
Key players in plant breeding have responded positively to a newly agreed proposal that will see so-called new genomic techniques, such as gene editing, permitted for use in the development of new fruit and veg varieties.
The CEO of Sun World International, Bernardo Calvo, said the decision to allow the production and sale of gene-edited varieties that could also occur naturally or through conventional breeding reflected a “more complete and nuanced understanding” of what the technology has to offer.
“Thanks to advances in science and technology, there are countless tools that will be added to classic breeding to improve precision and predicability,” he told Fruitnet. “As gene editing tools are increasingly implemented, they will effectively trigger desirable trait modifications without the insertion of any foreign material. They simply enhance the process of traditional breeding. They are not a new process.”
NGTs could offer potential advantages to growers in particular, he added. “The introduction of gene editing tools is particularly meaningful to our growers as they are always striving to offer their retail customers – and ultimately the consumer – the healthiest and most delicious fruit possible.
“And just as importantly, gene editing techniques will propel our longstanding sustainability work on genetics that prioritises disease resistance and climate change resilience.”
He added: “The EU’s decision reflects the careful and deliberate discernment that I feel is needed by regulators as innovations are introduced and studied.”
Xana Verweij, global biotech director at Dutch group Enza Zaden, said the change was an important step forward. “Until now, the EU regulatory framework classified products developed with NGTs as GMOs. As a company committed to non-GMO breeding, this meant we could not apply these techniques in our commercial variety development,” she explained.
“The provisional agreement creates the opportunity to explore these technologies more broadly and, when appropriate, integrate them into Enza Zaden’s variety development programmes.”
NGTs would enable companies like Enza Zaden to accelerate advances in genetics, she added, and enable the development of vegetable varieties with improved resilience and quality.
“This is critical in addressing global challenges such as food security, climate adaptation, and sustainable agriculture. However, we will take careful steps to explore this direction not only from the technology but also the regulatory and societal perspective, and inform our employees and external stakeholders if we decide to go for NGT product commercialisation.”
Eduard Fitó, director of Spanish group Semillas Fito, agreed that the new legal framework would allow breeders to use certain methods that could make their research “a bit more precise”, but he didn’t think there would be any major changes to those companies’ methods.
What about consumers?
The bigger question, Fitó suggested, was whether or not consumers will accept products that have been bred using NGTs.
“This is precisely the biggest obstacle,” he argued. “For Fitó, it’s essential to create added value to differentiate ourselves and grow the market and its value. Product differentiation based on a production method doesn’t offer anything to the consumer.
“We believe it forces us to differentiate products where there is no differentiation. If there’s no real added value, the consumer won’t want to pay more. Perhaps if doubt arises, they’ll pay less for the technology.”
For Verweij, acceptance among European consumers would depend on clear communication about gene editing technology’s benefits, safety, and the value in terms of food security and sustainability.
“For Enza Zaden, this means continuing to communicate openly about why and how we use these tools,” she said, “emphasising our commitment to non-GMO principles where applicable, and ensuring that innovation aligns with consumer expectations and regulatory frameworks.”
‘Good outcome’
For companies already involved and invested in gene editing, the timing of the EU proposal does not appear to have come as a surprise.
“With Denmark holding the Council Presidency this term, we anticipated that the file would be pushed forward, and the likelihood of a vote being scheduled had been clear for some time,” said Lena Maas, head of R&D operations at Hudson River Biotechnology, which already employs Crispr gene editing technology to breed new plant varieties. “The specific timing of the vote became evident about a week in advance.”
Maas added: “We are very pleased with the outcome. Seeing NGT1 plants positioned to be treated as non-GMO marks a significant and long-needed step toward a more innovation-friendly framework for Europe.”
