The US Coordinated Framework for Biotechnology uses existing statues within USDA, FDA, and EPA to regulate biotechnology. This framework follows a product-based paradigm, meaning that it is the product of a biotechnology process, rather than the process itself which is the focus of regulatory interest. In 2018, the USDA announced it would not regulate gene editing as a GMO if the product is not a plant pest, was not developed using a plant pest, and could have theoretically been created through conventional breeding methods. However, the FDA and EPA have not yet announced how they intend to regulate gene editing.
Since the commercialization of GMOs in 1996, food and environmental organizations have critiqued GMOs, which has had important implications for their governance. Most recently, the national “right to know” movement around GMOs in foods led to the creation of the National Bioengineered Food Disclosure Standard that requires foods containing GMO ingredients to be labeled. This labeling standard is set to come into effect in 2020. However, gene edited foods are not considered to be GMO ingredients under the standard; thus, their presence in a food product does not currently need to be disclosed.
Earlier research conducted by project team members has found that since 2016, GEAF proponents have been active in advancing three key complementary sociotechnical imaginaries with the goal of building public trust in GEAF and shaping a regulatory environment where GEAF will not be regulated as GMOs nor require labeling. These include that gene editing is socially desirable because it is equivalent to traditional plant breeding, only faster and more precise, and that this speed and ease of use will democratize access and control to a wide range of companies and start-ups, including non-profits. According to proponents, this enhanced access will allow gene editing to play a critical role in addressing the problem of climate change.
Since the commercialization of GMOs in 1996, food and environmental organizations have critiqued GMOs, which has had important implications for their governance. Most recently, the national “right to know” movement around GMOs in foods led to the creation of the National Bioengineered Food Disclosure Standard that requires foods containing GMO ingredients to be labeled. This labeling standard is set to come into effect in 2020. However, gene edited foods are not considered to be GMO ingredients under the standard; thus, their presence in a food product does not currently need to be disclosed.
Earlier research conducted by project team members has found that since 2016, GEAF proponents have been active in advancing three key complementary sociotechnical imaginaries with the goal of building public trust in GEAF and shaping a regulatory environment where GEAF will not be regulated as GMOs nor require labeling. These include that gene editing is socially desirable because it is equivalent to traditional plant breeding, only faster and more precise, and that this speed and ease of use will democratize access and control to a wide range of companies and start-ups, including non-profits. According to proponents, this enhanced access will allow gene editing to play a critical role in addressing the problem of climate change.