However, population growth, industrialization and urbanization have accelerated the decline and extinction of species as well as the degradation of ecosystems. The losses are due to a range of pressures driven by socio-economic factors, including climate change, ecosystem degradation, illegal trade and unsustainable use.
More than member-states and over 6, participants have been meeting for more than 25 years to deliberate and come up with policies to protect biodiversity. Manuela Campa, a biotechnologist in the genetics department at Stellenbosch University in South Africa, opined that agricultural biotechnology portends no danger to the environment and instead helps to improve crops and conserve the environment.
He noted that biotechnology can help prevent crop deterioration during storage, thus reducing food waste. This is even true for crops that can be implemented for better yield or resistance to pathogens or abiotic stresses. This means less loss during agriculture. A recent development, partly in response to negative public reactions to the growing use of genetically modified crops in agriculture in some countries, has been the introduction of measures in a number countries, especially in Europe, and most recently Japan, to label some or all biotechnology-based products, with the aim of giving consumers more choice.
There is also a view by some regulatory authorities for regulatory requirements relating to GMOs to be based on a more precautionary approach. This approach is based on the proposition that not enough may be known about long-term adverse effects of GMOs, and thus requires prior evidence of the safety of biotechnology based products for human health and the environment. The current debate on labeling includes the issues of whether product labeling should be mandatory or voluntary, what information should be on the label so as to inform consumers as to their choice, and whether labeling is feasible in bulk commodities that may contain a mixture of GMO and non-GMO crops.
During the negotiations to establish the Convention on Biological Diversity in the early s, there was concern expressed by some governments that GMOs may pose a risk to biological diversity. Consequently, intergovernmental negotiations have been in progress over the past several years to negotiate a legally binding biosafety protocol under the Convention on Biological Diversity CBD. The centerpiece of the draft protocol is an advance informed agreement AIA procedure to be followed prior to the transboundary transfer of GMOs called living modified organisms or "LMOs" in the protocol.
LMOs that will come into contact with the environment of an importing country are to be covered under the AIA, to assess them for any potential adverse impacts on biodiversity. There is debate, however, as to which LMOs should be regulated by the protocol and for what purpose. A key point of disagreement centers around whether LMOs, which are intended for food, feed, or processing rather than for use as seed in the importing country, should be covered under the AIA procedure.
These LMOs, called "commodities," would include GM crops such as soya or corn, which form a growing component of the international agricultural commodity trade in these crops.
A group of major agricultural exporting countries the Cairns group argues that agricultural commodities should be excluded from the AIA procedure, because such LMOs are not intended for release into the environment and therefore cannot pose a threat to biological diversity.
This is consistent with current trade in commodities, under existing international agreements, where seed contaminated with plant diseases can be marketed internationally for consumption but not for planting. The Cairns group also contend that providing detailed information on LMOs in bulk agricultural commodity shipments is not feasible, given the commingling of genetically modified and conventional seed, as well as the lack of a direct business link between seed growers and exporters.
Other countries are calling for all first time transfers of LMOs, including commodities, to be covered by AIA, as the only way to monitor entry of such LMOs into a country. Some also believe that the protocol should allow for consideration of any human health impacts of LMOs as well as their environmental impact.
These countries also point out that "intended use" of LMOs for processing rather than planting into the environment cannot always be guaranteed once these commodities are within a country's borders. Another key dispute within the biosafety protocol negotiations is how decisions under AIA can be based on science and precaution.
Those calling for sound science to be the basis for decision making note that reliance on an excessively precautionary approach could result in discriminatory or unjustifiable barriers to international trade in LMOs. Those favoring additional precautionary approaches note that unambiguous scientific evidence of harm relating to LMOs may not be forthcoming in the short term. The latter argue, therefore, for the need for precaution in the face of scientific uncertainty to ensure the safety of genetically modified products for human health and the environment.
The final major issue is how a country's obligations under the CBD and any agreed biosafety protocol should relate to a country's rights and obligations under World Trade Organization WTO agreements. The next round of negotiations for the Biosafety Protocol are to be held in Montreal in January The health effects of foods grown from genetically modified crop varieties sometimes called GM foods depends on the specific content of the food itself and may have either potentially beneficial or occasional harmful effects on human health.
For example, a GM food with a higher content of digestible iron is likely to have a positive health effect if consumed by iron-deficient individuals. Alternatively, transfer of genes from one species to another may also transfer allergic risk and these risks need to be evaluated and identified prior to commercialization. Individuals allergic to certain nuts, for example, need to know if genes conveying this trait are transferred to other foods such as soybeans and would labeling be required if such crops were to be commercialized.
There is also some concern as to the potential health risks from the use of antibiotic resistance markers in GM foods, although there is no evidence of this. Labeling also may be needed in some countries to identify other novel content resulting from genetic modification for cultural and religious reasons or simply because the consumers want to know what is the content of the food and how it was produced to make an informed choice, independent of any health risks. Among the potential ecological risks identified are increased weediness, due to cross pollination whereby pollen from GM crops spreads to non-GM crops in nearby fields.
This may allow the spread of traits such as herbicide-resistance from genetically modified plants to nontarget plants, with the latter potentially developing into weeds. This ecological risk may be assessed when deciding if a GMO with a given trait should be released into a particular environment, and if so, under what conditions.
Where such releases have been approved, the monitoring of the behavior of GMOs after their release is a rich field for future research in crop ecology. Other potential ecological risks stem from the widespread use of genetically modified corn and cotton with insecticidal genes from Bacillus thuringiensis the Bt genes.
This may lead to the development of resistance to Bt in insect populations exposed to the GM crops. An attempt to manage this risk is being done in the early plantings of GM crops by planting "refuge" sections of Bt-cotton fields with insect susceptible varieties to reduce the opportunity of the insect population to evolve towards resistance to the plants having the Bt gene for resistance Gould, There also may be a risk to nontarget species, such as birds and butterflies, from the plants with Bt genes.
The monitoring of these effects of new transgenic crops in the environment and the devising of effective risk management approaches is an essential component of further research in risk management. Technology-transcending risks include the social and ethical concerns that modern biotechnology may increase the prosperity gap between the rich and the poor, both internationally and within individual societies, and that it may contribute to a loss of biodiversity.
There also are ethical concerns as to the moral dimensions of patenting living organisms and the cross-species movement of genes. These risks relate to the use of the technology, not the technology itself. The management of these risks requires policies and practices that give consumers choices while also promoting environmentally sustainable development through the judicious use of new developments in science and technology.
The reduction of biodiversity is a technology-transcending risk. The reduction of biological diversity due to the destruction of tropical forests, conversion of more land to agriculture, overfishing, and the other practices to feed a growing world population is more significant than any potential loss of biodiversity due to the adoption of genetically modified crop varieties. This is not an issue restricted to transgenic crops. Farmers have adopted new commercially developed varieties in the past and will continue to do so when they perceive this to be to their advantage.
On occasion, introduced varieties may enhance biological diversity, as for example for wheat in Turkey and corn in Mexico where new landraces are evolving by genetic introgression of genes from improved varieties into traditional landraces.
To slow the continuing loss of biodiversity, the main tasks are the preservation of tropical forests, mangroves and other wetlands, rivers, lakes, and coral reefs. The fact that farmers replace traditional varieties with superior varieties does not necessarily result in a loss of biodiversity. Varieties that are under pressure of substitution also can be conserved through in vivo and in vitro strategies.
Improved governance and international support are necessary to limit loss of biodiversity. Actually or potentially useful biological resources should not be lost simply because we do not know or appreciate them at present Leisinger, Risks and opportunities associated with GM foods may be integrated into the general food safety regulations of a country.
The regulatory processes are a matter of continuing scrutiny and debate at the national and international levels as more products of biotechnology come close to market. A science-based, efficient, transparent regulatory system, which enjoys the confidence of the public and the business and farming communities, is essential in enabling the effective use of biotechnology.
This system should be closely associated with existing regulatory arrangements for new pharmaceuticals, foods, and agricultural and veterinary products. National regulatory systems are complemented by international technical guidelines.
National food safety and biosafety regulations should reflect international agreements, a society's acceptable risk levels, the risks associated with not introducing modern biotechnology, as well as alternative means to achieve the desired goals. There is need for a fair system for intellectual property IP management that protects the interests of the inventors while promoting the safe use of the new biotechnologies.
All countries who are signatories to WTO have agreed to put in place a system for the protection of intellectual property rights, including protection of new plant varieties, although many have still to do so.
These new IP systems need to include ways to reward not only the inventors of new technologies but also those farmers who have been traditional improvers of plant varieties over centuries. Seawater bioprocesses to produce fuel and chemicals.
For instance, new bioprocesses can turn some types of seaweed grown in the oceans into biofuels, potentially providing an energy solution to countries that lack arable land and access to freshwater.
Additionally, bacteria and microalgae that live and grow in seawater can be engineered to grow more efficiently and be used to produce chemicals, fuels and polymeric materials. Zero-waste bio-processing. Environmentalists have long dreamed of a zero-waste society and new bio-processing techniques could help to make this a reality. Biorefineries — facilities that integrate biomass conversion processes and equipment to produce fuel, power, heat and value-added chemicals from biomass — can turn industrial waste streams into chemicals and fuels, thereby closing the production loop.
Recent advances include using less-costly inputs in the bio-process, such as carbon dioxide, methane and waste heat. Other advances are also simplifying the waste streams, reducing their toxicity and moving society closer to the goal of zero waste. Carbon dioxide as a raw material. Carbon dioxide and other carbon molecules are seen as a culprit in global warming, and the environmental consequences of more of these compounds entering the atmosphere is becoming increasingly clear.
Recent advances are rapidly increasing our understanding of how living organisms consume and use carbon dioxide. By harnessing the power of these natural biological systems, scientists are engineering a new wave of approaches to convert waste carbon dioxide and other molecules into energy, fuel, chemicals, and materials that may help the world meet its needs. Regenerative medicine to create new organs. Many societies that are grappling with the challenge of a rapidly ageing population are increasing the demand for regenerative medicine, which holds the promise of growing tissue and organs in the laboratory and allows surgeons to safely implant them when the body is unable to heal itself.
Traffic accidents and war amputations are also spurring interest in the field. Scientists are already able to engineer tissue using various biomaterials, and believe that stem cells, especially ones called induced pluripotent stem cells adult cells that have been genetically reprogrammed to an embryonic stem cell-like state provide another significant opportunity in this field.
Rapid and precise development and manufacturing of medicine and vaccines. The ability of therapeutics and vaccines to treat and prevent diseases has been well documented. Biotechnology has been central to these advances, progressively offering the ability to make more complicated medicines and vaccines, opening up the treatment and prevention of a broader set of diseases. The leading edge of biotechnology is now offering the potential to rapidly produce therapeutics and vaccines against virtually any target.
Accurate, fast, cheap, and personalized diagnostics and prognostics. One of the most real and serious threats to the human race is a potential global pandemic.
Biotechnology has the potential to provide the platforms needed for rapid identification of biological threats, development of potential cures and global manufacturing of the solutions.
0コメント