Participants are invited to comment on and add views to the submission by China in this thread.
posted on 2019-09-08 23:43 UTC by Ms. Paola Scarone, Secretariat of the Convention on Biological Diversity
Many thanks for the submission by China, detailing 3 cases evaluating S-E effects of LMOs! Fantastic to have a 15year data-set (Bt cotton)!
Although extremely useful & insightful, it would be good to have Chinese comment on the utility (at least in retrospect) of the Guidance document:
* Noting of course that all three studies (and particularly the Bt cotton study!) well predated the AHTEG's Guidance document.
* It is not clear if these studies were undertaken/initiated/commissioned by the Chinese regulators in response to the original application, or are rather self-initiated Academic studies.
*The purpose of the studies appear to be more evaluating direct impacts of the LMO (and its use), than SE considerations arising from the impact of the LMO on the conservation & sustainable use of biological diversity (although the Bt cotton study did consider an outbreak of secondary pests). Were there anticipated biodiversity impacts for the GM maize (2nd study) or of herbicide & pesticide use on GM crops (3rd study)?
Ben Durham (South Africa)
posted on 2019-09-09 09:02 UTC by Mr. Ben David Durham, South Africa
Its quite an interesting submission by China and I especially acknowledge the sustainability of the GM products along with time as indicated in their study.
I am in line with your observations (Ben Durham) in the submission. Its clear that Bt Cotton commercialization in the country predates the guidance document, however the study gave an idea of the necessity to also consider the state of SE standards as regards posts commercialization. As you said, the 15year study is quite commendable.
I also noticed that the GM Maize is yet to be commercialized in China according to the submission and SE issues has been considered in their case study. I would like China to explain the level of public engagement in their consideration and to an extent the possible ethical issues raised.
I am also very concerned about the study. It seems that its more of an an academic study for national development than the China GM regulators style of operation. I would like China to clear us on this issue and at same time highlight the China's Competent Authority (Regulators) process of consistency in SE Considerations.
posted on 2019-09-10 18:25 UTC by Mr. Onyeka Kingsley Nwosu, Nigeria
Many thanks to China for the submission and for sharing those studies. Yet we would appreciate some clarification on what are the elements/ criteria to be looked at in socioeconomic considerations in their regulatory context. We would also appreciate a little bit of reflection on the voluntary guidance by the AHTEG noting that they have a long standing experience with GMOs.
posted on 2019-09-14 09:57 UTC by Prof Ossama AbdelKawy, Seychelles