Europe’s Farm to Fork Strategy and Its Commitment to Biotechnology and Organic Farming: Conflicting or Complementary Goals?

Sustainable food systems will require profound changes in people’s consumption patterns and lifestyles, which is true regardless of the farming methods used does not change fact that organic often requires more land than conventional for same quantity output.Some features EU contribute to Development Goals (SDGs); other may jeopardize achievement SDGs 2, 13, 15. The negative indirect effects additional land-use outweigh positive direct on global climate biodiversity, so a large-scale switch could possibly turn out be disservice sustainability.Achieving would benefit from inclusion biotech innovations farming.The implementation required law unlikely under current political realities but nevertheless recommended scientific perspective. European Commission’s Farm Fork (F2F) strategy, Green Deal, acknowledges innovative techniques, including biotechnology, play role increasing sustainability. At time, promoted, at least 25% EU’s agricultural shall by 2030. How can both biotechnology developed promoted simultaneously achieving (SDGs)? We illustrate benefits recent farming. This law. Otherwise, planned increase production F2F strategy result less sustainable, systems. Commission (EC) recently launched its strategy. cornerstone Deal instrumental working toward United Nations (SDGs) [32.European A Strategy Fair, Healthy Environmentally-friendly DG SANTE/Unit ‘Food information composition, waste'.2020Google Scholar]. new overall aim SDGs? It common interpretation legal framework regulates many products resulting novel techniques plant breeding as genetically modified (GM) organisms (GMOs), while processing legally exclude use GMOs. Hence, combining these two components appears conflicting challenging, if impossible, even though actually fit together very well permitted (Figure 1). Through few cases, we To make this possible, advocate Implementation such realities. Many national policymakers interest groups, nongovernmental organizations (NGOs), seem prefer coexistence policies whereby modern are strictly separated. Notwithstanding it hard justify strict separation ‘organic,’ ‘conventional,’ GMO point view, without change, In order produce or market an product foodstuff product, separating Recital 23 Regulation (EU) 2018/848 stipulates consumers’ perception incompatible with As result, according Article 11 2018/848, ‘the GMOs prohibited.’ precise, ‘GMOs, produced GMOs, feed, food, aids, protection products, fertilisers, soil conditioners, reproductive material, micro-organisms animals production.’ determine whether used, operators rely their labeling accordance rules combination principle, majority feed ‘containing, consisting GMOs’ (Article 1829/2003), understood defined Directive 2001/18, labeling. academics stakeholders judgment Confédération paysanne, most technologies, targeted mutagenesis through genome editing, subject regulations [1.Purnhagen K.P. Wesseler J.H.H. regulation technologies possible economic implications beyond.Appl. Econ. Perspect. Policy. 2020; (Published online September 28, 2020. https://doi.org/10.1002/aepp.13084)Crossref Scopus (15) Google Scholar,2.Purnhagen manage Union’s diversity: paysanne others.Common Market Law Rev. 2019; 56: 1379-1396Google Others argue certain applications still excluded postjudgment [3.Vives-Vallés J.A. Collonnier C. CJEU 25 July 2018 mutagenesis: Interpretation interim legislative proposal.Front. Plant Sci. 10: 1813Crossref PubMed (11) Scholar,4.van der Meer P. et al.The status genomic techniques.Eur. J. Risk Regul. 2021; January 6, 2021. https://doi.org/10.1017/err.2020.105)Crossref (5) Labeling exemptions apply adventitious technically unavoidable presence traces long they do exceed threshold level 0.9%, 1829/2003. applies have been authorized import processing. For approved, zero tolerance applies, those received risk assessment Food Safety Authority, 0.1% feed. case respective labeled GMO, assume no manufacture purchased [Article 11(3), 2018/848]. 11, only prohibits GMOs.’ Arguably, explicitly prohibited. means, example, foods using GM microbes practice considered ‘with’ Organic beer, bread, cheese allowed enzymes directly yeast bacteria. consumers consuming made technology over 35 years [5.Wesseler Agriculture Bioeconomy - Economics Policies. Wageningen University, 2015https://edepot.wur.nl/384179Google existing leads us assess focus contributes (including commonly such). cause environmental damage agriculture. promotes higher levels agrobiodiversity uses pollutants (e.g., synthetic pesticides inorganic fertilizer) [6.Clark M. Tilman D. Comparative analysis impacts systems, input efficiency, choice.Environ. Res. Lett. 2017; 12: 64016Crossref (431) Scholar], contributing 13 15 While some facets SDGs, aspects where limited extent biotechnological potential serve remedy. Given demand continues rise globally hunger reduction central SDG quantities remain relevant need factored in. disappear when evaluating per kilogram rather hectare taking absolute amounts needed into consideration [7.Tuomisto H.L. al.Does reduce impacts? meta-analysis research.J. Environ. Manag. 2012; 112: 309-320Crossref (460) One organically cultivated produces lower crop yield one conventionally conditions allow effective methods. ‘organic’ gap vary type several factors; studies suggest magnitude 20–25% experimental up 50% practical [8.Seufert V. Ramankutty N. shades gray context-dependent performance agriculture.Sci. Adv. 3e1602638Crossref (183) Scholar,9.Meemken E.M. Qaim agriculture, security, environment.Annu. Resour. 2018; 39-63Crossref (117) Increasing 7.5%, currently observed EU, total decree might various unintended implications. Effects range mere conversion farmland much loss regions areas low-yield systems) larger losses (in high-yield systems), entailing forests, swamps, natural habitats within elsewhere rising imports [9.Meemken Already today, 7.5% farming, Europe major importer vegetable oil protein palm oil, soy), deforestation Southeast Asia South America [10.Qaim al.Environmental, economic, social consequences boom.Annu. 321-344Crossref (68) More precisely, already about 5 million tons soybeans Brazil 55% soybean,i has linked illegally forested [11.Rajão R. rotten apples Brazil’s agribusiness.Science. 369: 246-248Crossref (115) Imports requirements being converted organic. Using threatens biodiversity therefore jeopardizes Also, responsible half Studies predict GHG emissions offset any agriculture [12.Smith L.G. greenhouse gas converting England Wales methods.Nat. Commun. 4641Crossref (73) jeopardizing 13. Reducing meat waste [13.Muller A. al.Strategies feeding world sustainably agriculture.Nat. 8: 1290Crossref (273) Scholar] alter results. output. Beyond gap, there further problems caused Especially potato horticultural production, toxic copper-based widely control fungal diseases [33.European Authority (EFSA) al.Peer review pesticide active substance copper compounds copper(I), copper(II) variants namely hydroxide, oxychloride, tribasic sulfate, copper(I) oxide, Bordeaux mixture.EFSA 16e05152PubMed Furthermore, insect pests controlled broad-spectrum biological insecticides known also harm honeybees nontarget organisms.ii Climate challenge mean temperatures, changing rainfall patterns, frequent weather extremes create stresses plants pest disease pressure dramatic [14.Bebber D.P. spread pathogens.Glob. Ecol. Biogeogr. 2014; 23: 1398-1407Crossref (238) diverse potentially system resilience [15.Serra T. al.Differential uncertainties attitudes between producers: Spanish arable farmers.Agric. 2008; 39: 219-229Crossref However, prohibiting chemical innovations, fewer tools available rapid adaptations, likely avoid shortfalls. significant particular. terms effects, commanded Innovations remedying SDGs. Several goals set improvement development hardier [16.Niggli U. Sustainability production: challenges innovations.Proc. Nutr. Soc. 2015; 74: 83-88Crossref (32) reached efficiently editing related techniques. Biotechnological agriculture’s narrowing gap. Recent advances, CRISPR/Cas9 rapidly evolving suite based CRISPR/Cas9, complement classic provide opportunities efficient trait management. Targeted introduction deletions insertions inactivate genes, precise single DNA bases, substitution small fragments [17.Chen K. al.CRISPR/Cas precision agriculture.Annu. Biol. 70: 667-697Crossref (487) facilitates improvement, system. traits inactivation gene, substantiated after advent [18.Zhang Y. al.A CRISPR way accelerating crops.Nat. Food. 1: 200-205Crossref (70) Crop constantly threat pathogens pests, prohibited Pest particularly high tropical favors microorganisms herbivorous insects. According predictions, increase. crop-producing countries expected fully saturated 2050 trends continue Some practices questionable consumer health. Genome approaches impact resistance health externalities; words, achieve easier [19.Niggli (47) An example Mlo confers durable powdery mildew barley. recessive allele mlo loss-of-function variant discovered decades ago landrace barley ever since [20.Kusch S. Panstruga mlo-based resistance: apparently universal ‘weapon’ defeat disease.Mol. Plant-Microbe Interact. 30: 179-189Crossref (127) Generating corresponding alleles species wheat, tomato, grape, crops achieves comparable [21.Wang al.Simultaneous three homoeoalleles hexaploid bread wheat heritable mildew.Nat. Biotechnol. 32: 947-951Crossref (1065) Scholar, 22.Pessina al.Knockdown MLO genes reduces susceptibility grapevine.Hortic. 2016; 3: 16016Crossref (90) 23.Pavan ol-2 gene conferring tomato mlo-homologue genetic cytogenetic co-localisation.Euphytica. 162: 91-98Crossref (24) Similarly, bacterial blight rice, important Asian African countries, was successfully engineered bases promoters encoding SWEET proteins [24.Oliva al.Broad-spectrum rice editing.Nat. 37: 1344-1350Crossref (224) pathogen longer activate expression sugar exporters thus lacks extracellular nutrient supply essential virulence. examples exist Scholar,25.Qaim Role security sustainable development.Appl. 42: 129-150Crossref (87) diversity resilient improve quality human diets, 3, (rice, maize) account calories consumed globally. gradual Neolithic revolution 12 000 taken bottleneck. Thanks progress molecular genetics, key alterations resulted dominance number now known. Two dwarfing (known ‘Green Revolution genes’) involved synthesis signal transduction phytohormone gibberellic acid controlling response day length [26.Eshed Lippman Z.B. Revolutions chart course old crops.Science. 366eaax0025Crossref (103) Systematic generation variation targets enable orphan thereby boost diversity. De novo domestication wild demonstrated [27.Fernie A.R. Yan domestication: alternative route future.Mol. Plant. 615-631Abstract Full Text PDF (151) agronomic quantitative nature (i.e., influenced multiple gene–environment interactions). Combining favorable genotype huge insurmountable alone. close linkage results simultaneous selection neighboring disadvantageous Lr67sus found next RhtD1b semidwarf allele, contributor increases yields past 60 [28.Moore J.W. evolved hexose transporter wheat.Nat. Genet. 47: 1494-1498Crossref (323) With tools, base edits applied break ‘linkage drag’ combine allele. each particular strength, unleash synergies reap objectives legislation, excludes needs changed. procedure act concerning organics corresponds ordinary procedure, involves Commission, formally proposes measure, Council Parliament. Parliament examine parallel proposal Commission. acts first decides adopt proposal, requests amendments, rejects altogether. After adopted position, Parliament’s position. Usually, adopts different opens second reading third reading, represents final stage procedure. proposals tripartite meetings Parliament, ‘trialogue’ meetings, bring actors agreement. regard governing organics, involvement voting pose obstacles. past, comitology shown qualified member states favor against authorization [29.Smart al.EU states’ authorizing crops: regulatory gridlock.German Agric. 64: 244-262Google Scholar,30.Mühlböck Tosun Responsiveness interests: Voting behaviour council Union.J. Common Mark. Stud. 385-402Crossref (25) mirror behavior, initiate calculated Turning because members, resolutions express position organics. These were dismissive varieties. February 16, 2014, resolution maize event 1507 asked ‘not propose authorize variety renew ones until significantly improved.’iii Therefore, institutions suggests reject modification laws facilitate policy effectively communicate (i) necessarily fall (ii) all default represent violation principle preserving integrity cell. Promoting allowing fail deliver promise moving realizing synergies, specific strengths law, particular, production. ambition lead developing mitigate adapt change. expand contribution bioeconomy faster capacity provided [31.Zilberman al.Agricultural – what know scientists disagree.Sustainability. 1514Crossref (40) retards address challenge. Improved communication gradually overcome deeply rooted prejudices among wider public (see Outstanding Questions).Outstanding QuestionsHow designed allows harnessing combined biotechnology?How cell?How strategy?Which and/or attainment SDGs?Which help remedy weaknesses respect biotechnology? cell? strategy? Which thank Markus Gierth excellent discussion partner. managed revised manuscript wrote introduction, part, conclusion. M.Q. drafted section innovations. S.C. A.P.M.W. J.T. remedy: All contributed revision drafts. L.F. Non-Executive Director Board Directors Syngenta. authors interests declare. ihttps://www.cbs.nl/en-gb/news/2020/40/soybean-imports-from-brazil-up-by-40-percent iihttps://www.umweltbundesamt.de/publikationen/entwicklungsperspektiven-der-oekologischen iiiwww.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=TA&reference=P7-TA-2014-0036&language=EN&ring=B7-2014-0007#def_1_12