Wendy Craig

An overview of general features of risk assessments of genetically modified crops

The intentional introduction into the environment or market of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) is nearly always governed by a framework of science-based risk assessment and risk management measures. This is usually implemented through the integration of hazard identification and characterisation of all of the elements of risk associated with a new GM crop or derived product. Typical categories of hazards arising from the introduction of transgenic crops include: possible unintended negative health effects in a susceptible subgroup of the consumer (target) population; the evolution of resistance in the targeted pest/pathogen populations when the transgene confers resistance to a pest or pathogen; non-target hazards associated directly or indirectly with the transgenic plant or transgene product outside the plant; and those associated with the integration and subsequent expression of the transgene in a different organism or species following gene flow. The consequences of likely exposure to these and other hazards are considered in this introduction to the main issues raised when evaluating the possible risks arising from the importation or cultivation of genetically modified crops.

What are the non-food impacts of GM crop cultivation on farmers' health?

BackgroundWith a steady increase in the area cultivated with genetically modified (GM) crops, the impacts of GM crop cultivation are coming under closer scrutiny around the world. The impacts on humans usually refer to possible risks to health occurring as a result of the GM food consumption. Other concerns, such as the claims of human health benefits arising from the cultivation of GM crops via reduced use of pesticides could be considered, if at all, under economic impacts of the technology. Similarly, other human health impacts could occur as a result of a modification of the amount of pesticides residues found in underground water, which could be considered under environmental impacts.Yet many GM crops are not consumed on-farm, either because they require processing before becoming edible (such as soya bean, cottonseed and oilseed) or because the entire harvest is sold to maximise profits. It would be certainly difficult to demonstrate the importance of GM foods health effects versus the non-food health effects of GM crop cultivation on farmers. However, the non-food health effects, although apparently receiving less attention, deserve a closer look because of their potential economic and environmental links.Methods/designThe primary research question is: What are the non-food impacts of GM crop cultivation on farmers’ health? To address specifically the main research question, the analysis focuses on two related secondary questions: 1) Does the cultivation of GM crops result in a lower number of pesticide-related poisonings? and 2) Does the cultivation of GM crops allow for higher financial resources to be used by farmers to improve their and their family’s health status? Further, the review will also evaluate the extent to which information relevant to the two secondary questions is freely-available. The abstracts of non-free articles, alongside their bibliographic details, will be included in a separate table, and if the information supplied would be detailed enough, a summary will be provided. The search and assessment methodologies (especially the search string, inclusion/exclusion criteria, data extraction table, data synthesis and presentation) were adapted following problems overcome, and experience gained, during a scoping search.

Putting problem formulation at the forefront of GMO risk analysis

When applying risk assessment and the broader process of risk analysis to decisions regarding the dissemination of genetically modified organisms (GMOs), the process has a tendency to become remarkably complex. Further, as greater numbers of countries consider authorising the large-scale dissemination of GMOs, and as GMOs with more complex traits reach late stages of development, there has been increasing concern about the burden posed by the complexity of risk analysis. We present here an improved approach for GMO risk analysis that gives a central role to problem formulation. Further, the risk analysis strategy has been clarified and simplified in order to make rigorously scientific risk assessment and risk analysis more broadly accessible to diverse stakeholder groups.

Experiences in sub-Saharan Africa with GM crop risk communication: outcome of a workshop.

In tackling agricultural challenges, policy-makers in sub-Saharan Africa (SSA) have increasingly considered genetically modified (GM) crops as a potential tool to increase productivity and to improve product quality. Yet, as elsewhere in the world, the adoption of GM crops in SSA has been marked by controversy, encompassing not only the potential risks to animal and human health, and to the environment, but also other concerns such as ethical issues, public participation in decision-making, socio-economic factors and intellectual property rights. With these non-scientific factors complicating an already controversial situation, disseminating credible information to the public as well as facilitating stakeholder input into decision-making is essential. In SSA, there are various and innovative risk communication approaches and strategies being developed, yet a comprehensive analysis of such data is missing. This gap is addressed by giving an overview of current strategies, identifying similarities and differences between various country and institutional approaches and promoting a way forward, building on a recent workshop with risk communicators working in SSA.

Key elements in a strategic approach to capacity building in the biosafety of genetically modified organisms

In recent times, it has become imperative for countries to define and implement policy in biosafety due to the widespread adoption of genetically modified crops. As such, countries wishing to utilise transgenic technologies in the development of advanced agricultural products must have regulations in place coupled with trained personnel in national competent authorities able to contribute effectively to the decision-making process. Capacity building initiatives play an important role in supporting such individuals, institutions and governmental authorities by providing training and/or physical structures/equipment and technical assistance. There are many types of capacity building activities; however not all have the same relevance in different regions of the world. For capacity building to be effective, a strategic approach incorporating a variety of forms and disciplines is desired. This commentary discusses the importance of factors such as: the targeting of support to relevant beneficiary(ies); the identification of specific needs and the incorporation of socio-economic conditions when elaborating effective strategies designed to help building capacity. Moreover, the importance of interaction and collaboration amongst the various capacity builders is also discussed such that unnecessary duplication of efforts and best use of available human and economic resources results.