‘US has inadequate regulatory oversight to address concerns presented by agricultural biotechnology’: US NGOs issue transparency principles and governance recommendations

Credit: iStock
Credit: iStock

Representatives of conservation and consumer non-governmental organizations unveiled six principles for responsible governance of gene editing in agriculture and the environment in an article published [August 11] in the July edition of Nature Biotechnology. The authors noted that gene editing and other biotechnologies have the potential to address urgent food security, environmental, and human health dilemmas, yet these technologies also raise potential for societal concerns, environmental and health risks, and conflicts with cultural and spiritual values.

The six principles outlined in the article include: 1) Effective, science-based government regulation; 2) Voluntary best practices that complement regulatory oversight; 3) Risk avoidance and delivery of tangible societal benefits; 4) Robust, inclusive societal engagement; 5) Inclusive access to technology & resources; and 6) Transparency on gene editing products in the environment.

Follow the latest news and policy debates on sustainable agriculture, biomedicine, and other ‘disruptive’ innovations. Subscribe to our newsletter.

Underscoring the timeliness of discussion of principles for gene editing and the inadequacy of the current governance and regulatory framework, the organizations note that several developers are currently poised to introduce gene-edited products into commerce and that the U.S. Department of Agriculture recently substantially deregulated gene-edited plants and proposed a similarly minimal oversight system for gene-edited animals.

[Editor’s note: Read the full Nature Biotechnology article here.]

Read the original post

{{ reviewsTotal }}{{ options.labels.singularReviewCountLabel }}
{{ reviewsTotal }}{{ options.labels.pluralReviewCountLabel }}
{{ options.labels.newReviewButton }}
{{ userData.canReview.message }}

Related Articles

Infographic: Global regulatory and health research agencies on whether glyphosate causes cancer

Infographic: Global regulatory and health research agencies on whether glyphosate causes cancer

Does glyphosate—the world's most heavily-used herbicide—pose serious harm to humans? Is it carcinogenic? Those issues are of both legal and ...

Most Popular

Screenshot-2026-05-01-at-1.29.41-PM
Viewpoint: What happens when whole grains meet modern food manufacturing? Labels don’t tell the whole story.
S
As vaccine rejectionism spreads, measles may be taking a more dangerous turn
ChatGPT-Image-Apr-13-2026-02_20_22-PM
Viewpoint: Misinformation infodemic? Why assessing evidence is so challenging 
Screenshot-2026-04-20-at-2.26.27-PM
Viewpoint — Food-fear world: The latest activist scientists campaign: Cancer-causing additives
ChatGPT-Image-Mar-27-2026-11_47_30-AM-2
FDA’s expedited drug reviews are hailed in some quarters but other approval practices are problematic
Screenshot-2026-03-13-at-12.14.04-PM
The FDA wants to make many popular prescription drugs OTC—a great idea. Here’s why it’s unlikely to happen
bigstock opioids on chalkboard with rol
GLP podcast: 'Safe injection sites': enabling drug addiction or saving lives?
circular-bioeconomy-should-focus-on-sustainable-wellbeing
GLP podcast: What's wrong with 'doomsday' environmentalism? It's false.
Farmers can talk to plants
Farmers are a major source of misinformation—about farming
Screenshot-2026-04-12-135256
Bixonimania: The fake disease scam that AI swallowed whole

Sorry. No data so far.

glp menu logo outlined

Get news on human & agricultural genetics and biotechnology delivered to your inbox.