Regulating Genetically Modified Organisms in Ireland – Laissez faire approach?

This chapter examines the legal framework applicable to genetically modified organisms (GMOs) in Ireland, bearing in mind the limited presence of GMOs. As a member of the European Union (EU), a specific, process-based regime applies regarding the authorisation and regulation of GMOs. This is intended to ensure a high level of environmental and human health protection and also enable producer and consumer choice. This regime is highly harmonized, but allows some flexibility regarding its implementation and, soon, the potential to opt-out from cultivation in part or entirely. Although, Ireland has only legislated on the area to the extent and in the manner required by the EU, it may avail of the opt-out in future – understandable in light of the lack of any cultivation currently and the green image of Ireland.
Complementary horizontal legislation and common law principles, relevant to labelling and varying forms of liability, deal with most issues that might arise quite comprehensively. However, they are quite complicated, overlapping and untailored and it is worth considering whether specific legislation should be developed to deal with liability related to GMOs.
Overall, Ireland holds varying stances to different forms of GMOs, with the greatest acceptance and use of GM-feed for pragmatic reasons. It has not developed a specific Irish approach, copy-pasting EU legislation and relying upon existing law to deal with any issues. This is understandable in light of the high level of harmonization and limited presence of GMOs in Ireland, but nonetheless will need to be developed as the availability of GMOs increases.

Political Posturing or Real Powers: Control of Genetically Modified Crops by the Member States and their Regions

The cultivation of genetically modified (GM) crops in the EU is highly harmonised, involving a central authorisation procedure that aims to ensure a high level of environmental and human health protection. However conflicts over authority persist and the Commission has responded to a combination of internal and external pressures with a more flexible approach to coexistence, a proposed opt-out clause and recently a promise by the head of the Commission to review the existing EU GM legislative regime, providing an opportunity to consider and suggest paths of development. In light of the significance of multilevel governance and subsidiarity for GM cultivation, this paper considers the policy-making powers of the Member States and subnational regions in this regime, focussing upon post-authorisation options in particular. A number of core mechanisms exist, including voluntary measures, safeguard clauses, coexistence measures, a proposed express opt-out and Article 4(2) TEU on ‘national identity. These mechanisms are examined in light of the goals and challenges of multilevel governance, in order to consider whether the relevant powers are located at the appropriate level. Overall, it is apparent that the developments occurring at the EU level are strengthening multilevel governance, but with significant opportunities to improve it further through focussing on the supporting roles and the regional levels in particular.

Attaining Subsidiarity-Based Multilevel Governance of Genetically Modified Cultivation?

The cultivation of genetically modified (GM) crops in the EU is highly harmonised, but with persisting conflicts over authority. The Commission responded to internal and external pressures with a more flexible approach to coexistence, a proposed opt-out clause and a promise to review the existing EU GM regime, providing an opportunity to consider and suggest paths of development. This article considers the post-authorisation policy-making powers of Member States and subnational regions, in light of subsidiarity-based multilevel governance. It considers the different approaches to risk-centred issues and more general policy choices. Overall, the developments occurring at the EU level are strengthening subsidiarity-based multilevel governance within the GM cultivation regime, but with significant opportunities to improve it further through focussing on the complementary powers, coordination and the regional levels in particular.

Excluding Coexistence of GMOs? The Impact of the EU Commission's 2010 Recommendation on Coexistence

In the midst of the European Union (EU) genetically modified organisms (GMOs) regime, coexistence of GM and non-GM crops alongside each other remains technically within the competence of the Member States. Post EU authorization of a GM crop, Member States may legally take appropriate measures to limit or prevent the presence of GMOs within non-GM crops. In July 2010, as part of a Cultivation Package, the Commission created a new Coexistence Recommendation that supports a flexible approach to more stringent coexistence measures by the States, while attempting to maintain control over the legitimate objectives justifying the measures. This article analyzes the impact of the 2010 Recommendation upon coexistence in the context of the existing practices and the previous 2003 Recommendation, taking into account its status as a soft law document and the ‘domino effect’. It is argued that the 2010 Recommendation may have greater practical and legal ramifications for coexistence than might first be thought. In attempting to create guidelines that allow a more flexible and inclusive approach towards national measures, the 2010 Recommendation may act as a catalyst to eventually exclude GM cultivation within Member States.

Coexistence of GMOs in the EU – A Veritable Choice?

This chapter examines the issue of coexistence of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) alongside conventional and organic crops. The central focus is on whether there is a veritable opportunity for coexistence of all three types of crops, which allows for freedom of choice by both farmers and consumers. It commences by considering the nature of the general GM regime, the relationship between the frameworks for cultivation and the use and sale of GM food and feed, and the main elements of the cultivation regime. In light of this, the concept of coexistence is considered, with an evaluation of both the legal and practical elements. Although the general GM regime is controlled at an EU level, coexistence is apparently left to the Member States who may take appropriate coexistence measures. Nonetheless, the Commission has created Recommendations that are to guide the Member States in their choice of measures. To a great extent, what is considered ‘appropriate’ is to be determined by the economic impact upon the farmers and the relationship with the labelling thresholds. The chapter evaluates the future of coexistence, bearing in mind the continued use of the safeguard clauses, the declaration of ‘GM-free’ regions, the potential for national ‘opt-outs’ and the general practical challenges of maintaining coexistence including the ‘domino effect’. Overall, it is arguable that coexistence is a misnomer and that if the term’s meaning is strictly maintained then veritable coexistence that allows for freedom of choice by both farmers and consumers seems unattainable. Although not directly controlled by CAP, there are strong areas of overlap and they share a number of similar objectives; the chapter will conclude by considering whether the approaches in relation to CAP and the cultivation of GMOs are converging or diverging.

Historical data reveal power-law dispersal patterns of invasive aquatic species

Understanding how invasive species spread is of particular concern in the current era of globalisation and rapid environmental change. The occurrence of super-diffusive movements within the context of Lévy flights has been discussed with respect to particle physics, human movements, microzooplankton, disease spread in global epidemiology and animal foraging behaviour. Super-diffusive movements provide a theoretical explanation for the rapid spread of organisms and disease, but their applicability to empirical data on the historic spread of organisms has rarely been tested. This study focuses on the role of long-distance dispersal in the invasion dynamics of aquatic invasive species across three contrasting areas and spatial scales: open ocean (north-east Atlantic), enclosed sea (Mediterranean) and an island environment (Ireland). Study species included five freshwater plant species, Azolla filiculoides, Elodea canadensis, Lagarosiphon major, Elodea nuttallii and Lemna minuta; and ten species of marine algae, Asparagopsis armata, Antithamnionella elegans, Antithamnionella ternifolia, Codium fragile, Colpomenia peregrina, Caulerpa taxifolia, Dasysiphonia sp., Sargassum muticum, Undaria pinnatifida and Womersleyella setacea. A simulation model is constructed to show the validity of using historical data to reconstruct dispersal kernels. Lévy movement patterns similar to those previously observed in humans and wild animals are evident in the re-constructed dispersal pattern of invasive aquatic species. Such patterns may be widespread among invasive species and could be exacerbated by further development of trade networks, human travel and environmental change. These findings have implications for our ability to predict and manage future invasions, and improve our understanding of the potential for spread of organisms including infectious diseases, plant pests and genetically modified organisms.

Nitric oxide synthase gene therapy enhances the toxicity of cisplatin in cancer cells

BACKGROUND AIMS: Cell-based gene therapy is an alternative to viral and non-viral gene therapy. Emerging evidence suggests that mesenchymal stem cells (MSC) are able to migrate to sites of tissue injury and have immunosuppressive properties that may be useful in targeted gene therapy for sustained specific tissue engraftment. METHODS: In this study, we injected intravenously (i.v.) 1x10(6) MSC, isolated from green fluorescent protein (GFP) transgenic rats, into Rif-1 fibrosarcoma-bearing C3H/HeN mice. The MSC had been infected using a lentiviral vector to express stably the luciferase reporter gene (MSC-GFP-luci). An in vivo imaging system (IVIS 200) and Western blotting techniques were used to detect the distribution of MSC-GFP-luci in tumor-bearing animals. RESULTS: We observed that xenogenic MSC selectively migrated to the tumor site, proliferated and expressed the exogenous gene in subcutaneous fibrosarcoma transplants. No MSC distribution was detected in other organs, such as the liver, spleen, colon and kidney. We further showed that the FGF2/FGFR pathways may play a role in the directional movement of MSC to the Rif-1 fibrosarcoma. We performed in vitro co-culture and in vivo tumor growth analysis, showing that MSC did not affect the proliferation of Rif-1 cells and fibrosarcoma growth compared with an untreated control group. Finally, we demonstrated that the xenogenic MSC stably expressing inducible nitric oxide synthase (iNOS) protein transferred by a lentivirus-based system had a significant inhibitory effect on the growth of Rif-1 tumors compared with MSC alone and the non-treatment control group. CONCLUSIONS: iNOS delivered by genetically modified iNOS-MSC showed a significant anti-tumor effect both in vitro and in vivo. MSC may be used as a target gene delivery vehicle for the treatment of fibrosarcoma and other tumors

Future novel threats and opportunities facing UK biodiversity identified by horizon scanning

1. Horizon scanning is an essential tool for environmental scientists if they are to contribute to the evidence base for Government, its agencies and other decision makers to devise and implement environmental policies. The implication of not foreseeing issues that are foreseeable is illustrated by the contentious responses to genetically modified herbicide-tolerant crops in the UK, and by challenges surrounding biofuels, foot and mouth disease, avian influenza and climate change.