Viewpoint: New Zealand’s case for genetically edited crops and foods

The world is struggling. The United Nations (UN) has calculated that the number of severely food insecure people had doubled in just two years.

There are now 276 million food-insecure people, with more than half a million experiencing famine. This is an increase of more than 500 per cent since 2016.

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

Calls to re-evaluate New Zealand’s stance on GE [gene editing] have also increased over recent years, with what some scientists hope is a game-changing report from the Productivity Commission appearing this year.

New Zealand firms: Reaching for the frontier, stated that a periodic review of regulatory regimes was good practice, “to ensure they remained fit for purpose, accommodated new technologies and did not stifle innovation”.

The Climate Change Commission made a similar recommendation in advice to government, and a new paper by fellow of the Royal Society of New Zealand, Dr John Caradus reviews the literature on science and perception, concluding that New Zealand should be “regulating the benefit-risk issues associated with the end-product of genetic modification rather than the processes used in their development”.

The bottom line must be the words from the UN – if we do not feed people, we feed conflict.

Scientists are doing everything they can to assist with improving food security and need all the tools available to assist.

This is an excerpt. Read the original post here

{{ 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

Picture1
The Orange Bowl without oranges: Can CRISPR save Florida citrus?
global warming
‘Implausible’: Top climate scientists reject worst-case scenario—soaring temperatures and fast-rising sea levels
vax-misinformation-main
Facts & Fallacies Podcast: Limit free speech to blunt social media misinfo?
Screenshot 2026-05-22 at 11.31
‘Realistic and durable’: EPA proposes loosening restrictions on some PFAS ‘forever chemicals.’
ChatGPT Image May 26, 2026, 12_06_53 PM
Fake Ebola cure promoters already cashing in as disinformation videos flood social media
ChatGPT-Image-May-1-2026-11_42_59-AM-2
Viewpoint: NAD is the wellness grifters latest evidence-lite longevity fad. At least the mice are impressed.
Screenshot-2026-04-22-at-12.21.32-PM
Viewpoint: Why the retracted Monsanto glyphosate study doesn’t change the science—the world’s most popular herbicide is safe 
Screenshot-2026-05-21-at-12.15.17-PM
UK gene-editing milestone: Livestock barley that increases ruminant value and reduces methane emissions is first-approved CRISPR crop
ChatGPT Image May 24, 2026, 03_16_36 PM
Here come the biohackers' Enhanced Games—The Olympics for athletes doping up on steroids, hormones and peptides. What’s wrong with that?
Screenshot-2026-05-21-at-3.15.53-PM
Chiropractors may no longer be modern-day snake oil salesmen, but the benefits of their therapy are limited–at best
glp menu logo outlined

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