Environmental, agriculture groups tell APEC, ASEAN: Stop GMO policy integration

Quezon City, Philippines - Greenpeace, together with Magsasaka at Siyentipiko para sa Pag-
unlad ng Agrikultura (MASIPAG) and Sibol ng Agham at Teknolohiya (Sibat), called for a halt
on genetically- modified organisms (GMO) policy integration in the ASEAN and APEC agendas,
and urged the Philippine government to support the research and development of Ecological
Agriculture in the country. The activists also launched a large balloon with banner message
clamoring For a food-secure and GMO-free APEC and ASEAN.

Leaders of the Asia Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) member-economies are meeting in
Manila from Nov. 18-19, shortly after which the Association of the Southeast Asian Nations
(ASEAN) will meet on Nov. 21-23 in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia.

We are concerned that the Philippines, as host of APEC, is promoting genetically modified
crops in the region despite the opposition and legal challenges that it faces in its own territory,
says lawyer Zelda dT Soriano, Legal and Political Advisor of Greenpeace Southeast Asia, a non-
profit environmental group.

The Department of Agriculture (DA), meanwhile, continues to advocate for the creation of an
economic community, which will establish a single market and production base that will set a
common standard for GMO crops across the ASEAN region. In October, the DA also requested
APEC delegates to show improvements in implementation of GMO regulations in the country
[1].

At the press conference, Soriano pointed out that there is no scientific consensus on the safety of
GM crops and there are still no established results that support its cost and benefit.

Greenpeace and its allies believe that while the Philippines is the first ASEAN country with a
GM crops regulatory system in the region, it is far from being an ideal model or benchmark.
Though a policy statement and administrative order are in place, there is no law or legislation
passed that governs GM crops field-testing, commercialization, and related activities.

The current administrative order and its implementation is beset with complaints and questions
for lack or inadequacy of economic, social, environmental and other safeguards from the
potential adverse impacts and risks of GM crops, Soriano added.

In 2013, the Court of Appeals granted the petition of civil society groups and farmers against
field-testing of genetically modified eggplant or Bt talong in the Philippines. The the following
year, an extraordinary administrative opposition signed by more than 25,000 Filipinos was
submitted to the DA-Bureau of Plant Industry calling for transparency and reforms in the
regulation of GM crops. The agriculture agency has yet to act on the administrative petition.

Government policies are often contradicting, like promoting chemical farming, GMOs, and
organic farming. Controlling the transboundary flow of GM crops - in the context of ASEAN
economic integration -is even more challenging. Contamination by natural or accidental means
have been documented in so many countries and many times over, said Dr. Chito Medina,
Executive Director of MASIPAG.
An alternativeEcological Agriculture, a farming method that combines modern science and
innovation with respect for nature and biodiversityis available, according to Shen Maglinte,
Executive Director of SIBAT. Ecological Agriculture ensures healthy farming and healthy food.
It protects the soil, the water and the climate. It does not contaminate the environment with
chemical inputs or use genetically engineered crops. And it places people and farmers
consumers and producers, rather than the corporations that control food supply at its very heart.

Not all modern technologies in agriculture are good and appropriate. Chemical fertilizers,
pesticides and hybrid seeds introduced 50 years ago, through the Green Revolution,
impoverished farmers and damaged their farms. GM crops will do the same. Sustainable
Ecological Agriculture, an appropriate farming system technology, through the support of the
government, is the proper way forward, said Maglinte.

The groups are asking the Philippine government to address its own issues at home and to
immediately commence an administrative process to hear the opposition of Filipinos to GM
crops and overhaul its flawed regulation.

Factbox - GMO Food Regulations in Asia

Published September 8, 1999

September 1, 1999 | Reuters

SYDNEY -- Rules on genetic foods vary widely across Asia as controls begin to be introduced,
throwing markets into disarray. The Asia market is in a three-way split over genetically modified
organisms (GMOs).

Big importers such as Japan and Korea are more interested in consumer labelling and effects of
this on imported food. China is more interested in possible transgenic productivity injections into
its own food production. Countries such as Australia and Thailand are interested in both effects --
but are at different stages of awareness.

REGULATIONS

JAPAN decided in August, under pressure from consumers, that foods made with genetically
modified (GM) crops be specially labelled for both GM crops and food products beginning in
April 2001.

Under its food safety guidelines, Japan has approved 22 varieties of six GM crops for import and
sale, including soybeans, corn, rapeseed, potatoes, cotton and tomatoes.
Food products in which DNA or protein resulting from gene alteration cannot be detected using
current technologies, such as vegetable oil and alcoholic beverages, are exempt from the
labelling requirement. Animal feed is also exempt.

Traders say Japan's decision to require labels on GM food may slow expansion of GM crop
output in the United States, its biggest supplier, as Japanese food makers have begun seeking
non-GM crops to avoid labelling.

SOUTH KOREA's parliament on July 1 enacted a law requiring labelling of GM foods. The
government is yet to decide which products will be required to be labelled.

Meanwhile the country is moving into producing GM foods, with Nong Woo Seed Co Ltd, for
example, opening a genetic engineering department to develop GMO seeds.

AUSTRALIA/NEW ZEALAND: The Australian and New Zealand governments decided on

The Australia New Zealand Food Authority (ANZFA) is presently conducting safety assessments
of 20 commodities in broad categories including soy, canola and cottonseed oil. There are no
requirements for labelling on these products at present. Australia presently produces two GM
crops: cotton and carnations. Producers are seeking approvals for others.

MALAYSIA is typical of most Southeast Asian nations in having no present laws requiring
labelling of GM foods.

THAILAND, which also has no present labelling requirements, is gradually moving to address
the issue.

The recent seizure of a container of Thai canned tuna in oil by Greek customs, which demanded
proof the exports did not contain GMOs, highlighted the potential threat to Thai exports, and the
need for proper labelling, Karun Kittistaporn, head of the commerce ministry's business
economic department, recently said.

The country plans to introduce genetically modified cotton, papayas, tomatoes, chillies and
vegetables and imports products such as U.S. soybeans which are believed to be genetically
modified.

The government plans to address the issue in the longer-run because Thailand is a major food
producers, an official said.

CHINA so far remains mum on the GM foods issue, although it is clear that it would be far more
interested in boosting its own flagging agricultural productivity through the use of GM crops
than introducing strict labelling laws.
GM crops:

CHINA is moving strongly into producing a transgenic cotton crop, planting around one million
hectares of genetically modified cotton in the past year.

AUSTRALIA has two GM crops, cotton and carnations. About 30 percent of the present
Australian cottonseed crop of 975,000 tonnes with 698,000 tonnes of lint is genetically modified.

UNITED STATES proportion of main crops genetically engineered:

corn 33 pct

soy 50 pct

cotton 50 pct

TRADE: The U.S. is the world's leading producer of genetically modified crops, while Japan is a
major importer of corn and soybeans and prepared food products made from them.

U.S. total agricultural exports: US$51.7 bln 1998

U.S. agricultural exports to Asia: US$15.5 bln 1998

GMO-involved crops exports to Asia: US$4.8 bln 1998

U.S. agricultural exports to Japan: US$9.1 bln 1998

Of this, coarse grains US$1.6 bln

soybeans US$0.9 bln

cotton US$0.3 bln

Japan imported 2.45 million tonnes of soybeans in the first half of 1999, 86.2 percent from U.S.;
Japan also imported 9.13 million tonnes of corn in the first half, 96.5 percent from the U.S.

- See more at: [Link]

GMOs Around the World What Other Nations Are Doing About It
Ginger Shelby

GMO Grains

By now, everyone knows that Monsanto and GMOs are a hot topic of debate. An enraged public
marched against Monsanto in

May, an event that mainstream news agencies seemed to ignore. Protesters want this big business
bully out of our food supply, or at least they want them to have to announce their presence in the
grocery aisle. Ousting this corporate giant and their tax dollars will not be easy, but does
everyone share the American publics sentiment towards Monsantos GMOs? Lets take a look at
the state of GMOs in other countries around the world.

Africa
GM crops are allowed in all countries under strict regulation, with the exception of Zambia. In
2002, Zambia banned the importation of corn form the UN that contained GMOs. This left the
Zambian population in desperation during the drought that soon followed. In 2005, the
government changed its mind due to the severity of the hunger among the population. They are
currently considering reinstituting the ban. South Africa is the largest producer of GM crops on
the African Continent.

Asia
India and China are the largest producers of GMO crops in Asia. The most popular crop is
cotton. However, China also grows tomato, petunia, poplar, sweet peppers and papaya. Due to
the political atmosphere in India, national level regulations are difficult to enforce. GM crops are
also grown in Pakistan, the Phillipines and Myanmar. Japan has strict labeling laws and recently
rejected a shipment of GM crops from the US over concerns that were not compliant with their
regulations.

Austria
The Austrian public strongly opposes GM crops. The Austrian government is in line with the
opinions of the people. It has banned several products that were approved for use in the EU.
They maintain a skeptical stance of GM crops.

Bulgaria
Bulgaria originally imposed a moratorium on GMOs until further evidence on their safety could
be obtained. In 2010, they imposed a permanent ban due to public protests from the public.

European Union
The European Union authorized the cultivation oF GMO crops over a decade ago, but individual
countries have expressed differing levels of legal acceptance. As with the United States, legal
acceptance does not necessarily equate public acceptance. GMOs are viewed skeptically by a
majority of EU citizens. According to GMO Compass, some countries are more tolerant than
others, while they have been ousted in others. Although public opinion is uniformly opposed,
government responses have not always reflected the wishes of the people.

Finland
The Finnish government and the Finnish people are largely open to the idea of GMOs. To date,
no significant commercial cultivation has occurred due to incompatibility with Finlands climate.

France
The French government continues to debate the legality of a GMO moratorium. It has expressed
that there were serious safety concerns over the safety of GMOs, but a ban was declared illegal.

Germany
The stance in Germany is similar to that in the United States. The public is generally opposed to
GMOs, but the government supports it. The arguments are similar too. The German government
considers the potential for economic growth to weigh heavily in its decision. GMO crops account
for less than 1 percent of crop production in Germany.

Greece
Greece has established GMO free zones. The government continues to work on coexistence
regulations with conventional crops, but at present no GM crops are being grown.

Oceania
GMOs are allowed in Malaysia, New Zealand and Australia. However, they have strict labeling
requirements. They also have a strict approval process. In Australia, the main crops grown are
carnations, canola, and cotton. Territorial moratoriums are in place in Tasmania until 2014 and
South Australia until 2019. New South Wales allowed its moratorium to expire in 2011. Western
Australia has established GM free areas. New Zealand allows field trials but has not approved
any GM foods to be released for public consumption.
South America
Viewpoints on GMOs differ widely in Central and South America. Brazil and Argentina are the
biggest producers of GM crops in South America. Costa Rica, Honduras, Columbia, Bolivia,
Paraguay, Chile, and Uraguay allow the production of GM crops. They are strictly prohibited in
Ecuador.

Spain
Spain has the longest experience with GM crops. They have been grown there since 1998. They
have extensive acreage of GM corn, wheat, and barley. They do not have coexistence
regulations, but are currently working on developing them. There have been no lawsuits over
GM corn escaping into conventional crops. Although there are no formal regulations, farmers
have been able to work out good practices to successfully grow both GM and non-GM crops.

United Kingdom
GMOs have not met with fervent opposition, although the official governmental stance is
cautious. Production is being restricted until regulation and further studies can be conducted.

The U.S. and Canada have the most lax policy on GMOs. The United States is currently the
biggest grower of GM crops in the world. Canada is the biggest producer of GM canola. Canada
requires an extensive safety assessment before approving the planting of GM crops. The
regulatory atmosphere in the United States is loose, opening the door for many lawsuits over GM
crops contaminating conventional crops.

The world continues to debate the safety of GM crops and views safety data supporting them
with a critical eye. Other countries have developed some interesting solutions to the problem that
create an equitable compromise that both sides can live with, or at least tolerate. The
establishment of GMO free zones, strict labeling and approval requirements, and coexistence
regulations seem to represent the most practical and effective solutions. Compared to the United
States and Canada, other countries are not as willing to allow Monsanto and other GMO
producers free unrestricted production privileges. Perhaps we should take their example of
caution to heart in the future.

- See more at: [Link]