Jordan has established national biosafety measures through the Biosafety Instructions issued in 2009 under the Environmental Protection framework. These instructions define institutional responsibilities for handling applications related to living modified organisms (LMOs) and genetically modified organisms (GMOs). The Jordan Food and Drug Administration (JFDA) is responsible for applications concerning genetically modified food products, while the Ministry of Agriculture is responsible for genetically modified seeds and animal feed. In addition, the JFDA issued technical instructions on the labeling of genetically modified food products in 2020. Several biosafety-related guidelines and draft operational procedures were developed under the National Biosafety Framework project. However, Jordan has not yet adopted a dedicated Biosafety Law, and some elements of the national biosafety framework remain under development.

Jordan continues to implement the Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety through existing regulatory and administrative measures. Institutional responsibilities are shared among the Ministry of Environment, the Jordan Food and Drug Administration, and the Ministry of Agriculture. With support from the Global Environment Facility (GEF) and the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP), Jordan implemented the National Biosafety Framework project, which contributed to strengthening national capacities, developing draft legislation, preparing technical guidance documents, and enhancing laboratory capabilities for GMO detection. Despite these achievements, several challenges remain, including the absence of a dedicated Biosafety Law, limited financial and technical resources, the inactivity of the National Biosafety Committee, and the need for stronger coordination, monitoring, and information-sharing mechanisms.

Jordan does not currently have specific biosafety regulations addressing living modified organisms that are pharmaceuticals for humans. No applications related to such products have been submitted to the competent authorities during the reporting period. Should such products be introduced in the future, they would be subject to the relevant national regulatory requirements governing pharmaceuticals, public health, and biosafety, as applicable.

Jordan regulates certain aspects of the movement and use of living modified organisms through existing sectoral legislation and administrative procedures related to food safety, agriculture, public health, customs control, and environmental protection. Transit and contained use are addressed to a limited extent through these existing frameworks. No specific biosafety legislation dedicated exclusively to the regulation of transit or contained use of LMOs has been adopted. During the reporting period, no applications concerning the import of LMOs for contained use were submitted to the competent authorities, and no decisions were taken in this regard. Further efforts are needed to strengthen the regulatory framework governing contained use and transit of LMOs in accordance with the provisions of the Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety.

Jordan has established administrative procedures for the review of applications related to genetically modified organisms through the Biosafety Instructions and the competent national authorities. However, no notifications concerning intentional transboundary movements of living modified organisms for intentional introduction into the environment were received during the reporting period. No field trials, commercial cultivation, or intentional environmental releases of LMOs have been authorized or conducted in Jordan. Through the National Biosafety Framework project, draft guidance documents and technical procedures were developed to support decision-making, risk assessment, and risk management processes in accordance with the Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety. Jordan recognizes the precautionary approach reflected in the Protocol and acknowledges that, in situations involving insufficient scientific information or scientific uncertainty regarding potential adverse effects on biodiversity and human health, additional information and risk assessment would be required before a decision could be taken. Nevertheless, further capacity-building efforts are needed to strengthen national expertise and institutional arrangements related to environmental release, risk assessment, and decision-making under the Advance Informed Agreement procedure.

Jordan regulates the import and domestic use of genetically modified food products through existing administrative and regulatory measures implemented primarily by the Jordan Food and Drug Administration (JFDA). Applications concerning genetically modified food products are reviewed in accordance with relevant national requirements, including labeling provisions issued in 2020. Products containing genetically modified content above the established threshold are subject to labeling requirements. Jordan imports genetically modified food products and animal feed but does not cultivate or commercially produce living modified organisms domestically. Through the National Biosafety Framework project, technical guidance documents and capacity-building activities were developed to support biosafety decision-making processes. In situations where available scientific information is insufficient to adequately assess potential adverse effects on biodiversity or human health, competent authorities may request additional information or scientific evidence before taking a decision, consistent with the precautionary approach reflected in the Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety. Further strengthening of national risk assessment and decision-making capacities remains a priority.

Jordan has not reviewed or modified any decisions regarding intentional transboundary movements of living modified organisms during the reporting period. No notifications concerning intentional introduction of LMOs into the environment were received, and no related decisions requiring review were taken. Existing administrative procedures provide a basis for reconsideration of regulatory decisions where new information becomes available; however, a comprehensive biosafety-specific mechanism for the review and modification of decisions has not yet been fully developed. Strengthening national procedures for decision review and updating the biosafety regulatory framework remain important areas for future development.

Jordan has not established a specific mechanism for the application of the simplified procedure under Article 13 of the Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety. During the reporting period, no cases arose that would require the application of the simplified procedure, as no notifications concerning intentional transboundary movements of living modified organisms for intentional introduction into the environment were received. Consequently, no information regarding the use of the simplified procedure was communicated through the Biosafety Clearing-House. Future development of the national biosafety framework may consider the incorporation of procedures related to Article 13, where appropriate.

Jordan has not established any bilateral, regional, or multilateral agreements or arrangements specifically addressing biosafety or the transboundary movement of living modified organisms during the reporting period. Cooperation on biosafety-related matters has primarily taken place through participation in international initiatives, capacity-building activities, and projects implemented under the Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety, including support provided through the Global Environment Facility (GEF) and the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP). Jordan remains committed to strengthening regional and international cooperation in the field of biosafety and information exchange.

Jordan has established partial regulatory and administrative measures related to risk assessment and risk management of living modified organisms through the Biosafety Instructions and the institutional mandates of the competent authorities. During the implementation of the National Biosafety Framework project, technical guidance documents, draft operational procedures, and training programmes on risk assessment and risk management were developed. A number of national experts received specialized training in biosafety risk assessment. Although national authorities have access to relevant guidance materials and technical resources, no formal risk assessments related to environmental release, field trials, or commercial cultivation of LMOs were conducted during the reporting period, as no such applications were received. Jordan imports genetically modified food products and animal feed but does not cultivate or intentionally release LMOs into the environment. National laboratories possess limited capabilities for the detection and identification of genetically modified materials. However, additional technical, institutional, and financial support is needed to strengthen national capacities in risk assessment, risk management, monitoring, and long-term surveillance of LMOs. Jordan also recognizes the need for further guidance and capacity-building in specialized areas of biosafety risk assessment and environmental monitoring.

No cases of unintentional transboundary movement of living modified organisms were identified or reported in Jordan during the reporting period. Similarly, no releases of LMOs occurred within Jordan that could have resulted in transboundary movement to neighboring countries. Jordan does not currently have a dedicated biosafety mechanism specifically addressing notification procedures under Article 17

Jordan has established partial measures related to the handling, transport, packaging, identification, and documentation of genetically modified products through existing food safety, customs, and import control regulations. Imported food products containing genetically modified material are subject to regulatory oversight by the Jordan Food and Drug Administration, including applicable labeling requirements. Jordan possesses limited but functional technical capacity for the detection and identification of genetically modified materials through national laboratories, including accredited facilities. Laboratory personnel have received training in GMO detection methods, and relevant institutions have access to reference materials, detection protocols, and analytical tools. Sampling and testing activities are conducted primarily for imported food products. Despite these efforts, additional capacity-building is needed to strengthen national systems for identification, documentation verification, border control procedures, laboratory accreditation, and enforcement of biosafety requirements in accordance with Article 18 of the Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety.

The Ministry of Environment serves as the National Focal Point for the Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety in Jordan. Competent responsibilities related to biosafety are shared among several institutions, including the Ministry of Environment, the Jordan Food and Drug Administration, and the Ministry of Agriculture, in accordance with the Biosafety Instructions issued in 2009. A National Biosafety Committee was established to facilitate coordination among relevant institutions and to support decision-making on biosafety-related matters. Although the committee has not been active during the reporting period, cooperation among relevant authorities continues through existing administrative and regulatory mechanisms. Jordan has undertaken several initiatives to strengthen institutional collaboration and capacity through the National Biosafety Framework project, including training workshops, stakeholder consultations, technical meetings, and awareness-raising activities involving government institutions, laboratories, universities, and research organizations. Nevertheless, further efforts are required to strengthen institutional coordination, reactivate the National Biosafety Committee, and enhance the long-term operational capacity of competent authorities responsible for biosafety implementation.

Jordan possesses a number of biosafety-related legal and regulatory instruments, including the Biosafety Instructions and regulations applicable to genetically modified food products. However, during the reporting period, most of this information was not uploaded or updated in the Biosafety Clearing-House (BCH). In addition, no decisions concerning environmental release, contained use, unintentional transboundary movements, or other matters requiring BCH notifications were taken during the reporting period. Updating national records and information in the BCH remains a priority for future implementation of the Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety.

Jordan recognizes the Biosafety Clearing-House as an important mechanism for information exchange and international cooperation under the Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety. While national biosafety information exists in several institutions, information available through the BCH has not been regularly updated during the reporting period. Some institutional and contact information may be available; however, most legal, regulatory, and administrative information has not been uploaded or updated. Coordination among the National Focal Point and relevant institutions exists to some extent, but further strengthening is required to improve information exchange, reporting, and maintenance of BCH records. Jordan continues to face technical and institutional challenges related to updating and managing information in the BCH and recognizes the need for additional capacity-building and dedicated resources in this area.

Jordan provides a degree of protection for confidential information through existing administrative procedures and applicable national legislation governing official information and regulatory submissions. Although no dedicated biosafety-specific procedures for confidential information have been formally established, competent authorities may consider requests for confidentiality when reviewing applications related to genetically modified organisms. Further development of specific biosafety procedures concerning confidential information may be considered as part of future improvements to the national biosafety framework.

Jordan has benefited significantly from external support for biosafety capacity-building through the project “Implementation of the National Biosafety Framework of Jordan,” funded by the Global Environment Facility (GEF) and implemented with the support of the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP). The project contributed to strengthening institutional capacities, developing draft biosafety legislation and guidance documents, enhancing laboratory capabilities, supporting GMO detection activities, training national experts in risk assessment and risk management, and raising public awareness on biosafety issues. Despite these achievements, Jordan continues to face significant capacity-building needs related to risk assessment, risk management, monitoring, laboratory infrastructure, BCH participation, institutional coordination, and implementation of the Cartagena Protocol. Financial sustainability remains a challenge, and most biosafety activities continue to depend on external support. Jordan therefore recognizes the importance of continued international cooperation and access to financial and technical assistance to ensure effective implementation of the Protocol.

Jordan has undertaken a number of public awareness and capacity-building activities on biosafety through the implementation of the National Biosafety Framework project. These activities included awareness workshops, stakeholder consultations, technical training programmes, and the development and distribution of educational materials targeting governmental institutions, academia, laboratories, and other relevant stakeholders. Biosafety topics have been incorporated into selected educational and training activities, particularly those related to biotechnology, food safety, environmental protection, and scientific research. However, Jordan does not currently have a dedicated national biosafety communication strategy or a national biosafety website. Public participation mechanisms related specifically to biosafety decision-making remain limited, and no public consultations on LMO decisions were conducted during the reporting period, as no relevant decisions were taken. Strengthening public access to biosafety information and enhancing awareness of the Biosafety Clearing-House remain important national priorities.

Jordan has not entered into any bilateral, regional, or multilateral agreements specifically concerning transboundary movements of living modified organisms with non-Parties to the Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety. Jordan imports certain genetically modified food products and animal feed through established national regulatory procedures and import control mechanisms. Any imports originating from non-Parties are subject to the applicable national regulations and administrative measures governing food safety, agriculture, and environmental protection. Jordan seeks to ensure that any transboundary movement of LMOs remains consistent with the objective and principles of the Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety.

Jordan has established general regulatory and enforcement measures through existing legislation related to food safety, agriculture, customs control, and environmental protection that may be applied to prevent and address unauthorized imports or movements of genetically modified products. However, no dedicated biosafety-specific enforcement mechanism for illegal transboundary movements of living modified organisms has been established. During the reporting period, Jordan did not identify or receive reports of any illegal transboundary movements of LMOs. Relevant authorities, including customs authorities, the Jordan Food and Drug Administration, the Ministry of Agriculture, and the Ministry of Environment, cooperate in the implementation of import control and regulatory compliance measures. Further strengthening of inspection, monitoring, and enforcement capacities remains a priority for the effective implementation of the Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety.

Jordan has not established specific regulatory procedures or methodologies for incorporating socioeconomic considerations into decision-making related to living modified organisms. During the reporting period, no decisions concerning the intentional introduction of LMOs into the environment were taken that would require consideration of socioeconomic impacts under Article 26 of the Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety. While socioeconomic considerations may be relevant in future decision-making processes, particularly in relation to agriculture, food security, trade, and rural livelihoods, additional guidance, technical expertise, and capacity-building would be required to support their systematic assessment and integration into the national biosafety framework.

Jordan did not engage in formal bilateral, regional, or multilateral cooperation activities related to the implementation of the Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety during the current reporting period. Similarly, no specific cooperation activities were undertaken with other Parties concerning the exchange of scientific, technical, or institutional knowledge, the identification of LMOs, socioeconomic considerations, public awareness activities, or capacity-building initiatives under the Protocol. Nevertheless, relevant stakeholders from different sectors, including governmental institutions, universities, research organizations, laboratories, and other interested parties, have been involved in biosafety-related discussions and activities at the national level when appropriate. Jordan recognizes the importance of strengthening cooperation and stakeholder engagement in support of the effective implementation of the Cartagena Protocol and may seek opportunities to enhance such collaboration in the future.