Escajedo San-Epifanio Leire, Filibi Igor, Lasa López Ainhoa, Puigdomènech Pere, Uncetabarrenechea Larrabe Javier
Department of Public Law, Historical-Legal Sciences and History of Political Thought, University of the Basque Country, Bilbao, Spain.
Centre for Research in Agricultural Genomics - CRAG, Spanish National Research Center (CSIC) - Institut of Agro-food Research and Technology (IRTA) - Autonomous University of Barcelona (UAB) - University of Barcelona (UB), Barcelona, Spain.
Front Plant Sci. 2023 Mar 16;14:1141455. doi: 10.3389/fpls.2023.1141455. eCollection 2023.
This article addresses the scenarios that may be encountered by the first application for pre-market approval of a CRISPR-edited plant in the EU. Two alternative scenarios are considered in the short and medium term. One of these possible EU futures depends on the final drafting and approval of EU legislation on certain New Genomic Techniques, which was started in 2021 and is due to be quite advanced before the next European Parliament elections in 2024. Since the proposed legislation excludes plants with foreign DNA, two different approval processes for CRISPR-edited plants will coexist if the legislation enters into force: one for plants whose genome has been altered, resulting in mutagenesis, cisgenesis and intragenesis; and the second for plants whose alterations result in transgenesis in general. In the event that this legislative process does not succeed, CRISPR-edited plants in the EU could face a regulatory scenario whose foundations were laid in the 1990s: the regulatory framework that applies to GM crops, food and feed. In this review, an analytical framework has been built that considers in depth the two possible futures for CRISPR-edited plants in the EU. This framework emphasises the way in which the European Union and the Member States (MS), with their respective national interests, have historically shaped the regulatory framework for plant breeding in the EU. On the basis of the analyses carried out on the two possible futures for CRISPR-edited plants and of their potential with respect to plant breeding, the main conclusions are the following. Firstly, that the regulatory review that started in 2021 is not in itself "good enough" for plant breeding and CRISPR-edited plants. Secondly, that compared to its alternative, the regulatory review currently underway contains at least some promising improvements in the short term. Hence, thirdly, in addition to adopting the current regulation, the MS need to continue to work towards a substantial improvement in the legal status of plant breeding in the EU in the medium term.
本文探讨了欧盟首次申请对经CRISPR编辑的植物进行上市前批准时可能遇到的情况。在短期和中期考虑了两种替代情况。其中一种可能的欧盟未来情况取决于欧盟关于某些新基因组技术立法的最终起草和批准,该立法于2021年启动,预计在2024年下一届欧洲议会选举前会取得很大进展。由于拟议的立法排除了含有外源DNA的植物,如果该立法生效,经CRISPR编辑的植物将存在两种不同的批准程序:一种适用于基因组已改变从而导致诱变、顺式基因转移和基因内转移的植物;另一种适用于其改变通常导致转基因的植物。如果这一立法进程不成功,欧盟的经CRISPR编辑的植物可能面临一个在20世纪90年代奠定基础的监管情况:适用于转基因作物、食品和饲料的监管框架。在本综述中,构建了一个分析框架,深入考虑了欧盟经CRISPR编辑的植物的两种可能未来。该框架强调了欧盟和成员国如何基于各自的国家利益,在历史上塑造了欧盟植物育种的监管框架。基于对经CRISPR编辑的植物的两种可能未来及其在植物育种方面的潜力所进行的分析,主要结论如下。首先,2021年开始的监管审查本身对植物育种和经CRISPR编辑的植物来说“还不够好”。其次,与另一种情况相比,目前正在进行的监管审查在短期内至少包含一些有前景的改进。因此,第三,除了采用现行法规外,成员国还需要在中期继续努力大幅改善欧盟植物育种的法律地位。