Required Report - public distribution

**Date:** 7/14/2005

**GAIN Report Number:** UK5013

UK5013

**United Kingdom**

**Biotechnology**

**Agricultural Biotechnology Report**

**2005**

**Approved by:**

![](media/image1.wmf)Peter O. Kurz

U.S. Embassy

**Prepared by:**

Steve Knight

**Report Highlights:**

The United Kingdom (UK), as a member of the European Union (EU),
conforms to all EU Directives, Regulations and Objectives on
biotechnology. It is therefore recommended that this report be read in
conjunction with that produced by FAS/USEU.

Includes PSD Changes: No

Includes Trade Matrix: No

Annual Report

London \[UK1\]

\[UK\]

Table of Contents

[**Executive Summary 3**](#executive-summary)

[Production 4](#production)

[Policy 5](#policy)

[General 5](#general)

[Responsibility 5](#responsibility)

[International 6](#international)

[Approvals 6](#approvals)

[Research 6](#research)

[Coexistence 6](#coexistence)

[Traceability & Labelling 7](#traceability-labeling)

[Marketing 8](#marketing)

[Capacity Building 8](#capacity-building)

[Reference Material 8](#reference-material)

# Executive Summary

In 2004, U.S. exports of agricultural, fish and forestry products to the
UK were \$1.46 billion, a 14.4 percent increase on the 2003 level.
Albeit boosted by the strength of the pound against the dollar in 2004,
the UK is consistently a key market for U.S. agricultural products,
ranked the eighth most important destination for U.S. agricultural
products after major markets such as the NAFTA countries and Japan.
Strong areas for the U.S. are in intermediate products,
consumer-oriented food and drinks, forest products and seafood.

Consumer‑oriented products remain the most important sector in value
terms, amounting to 49 percent (\$712 million) of total exports of
agricultural, fish and forestry products to the UK in 2004. This record
figure is a rise of 22 percent on 2003, the fourth consecutive year of
growth and secures the UK at fourth on the league table of U.S.
destinations for consumer-orientated goods. Among consumer-ready
products, wine and beer are the biggest sellers while other
consumer-ready best prospects include processed fruits and vegetables,
sauces, and snack foods. It is these latter two products, many of which
contain soya or maize, and other similarly processed foods for which the
specter of the EU's biotechnology regime poses the largest burden. U.S.
companies' only choices if they wish to export to the UK are to
reformulate to remove any non-EU approved biotech ingredients, label if
the product contains more than 0.9 percent of any EU-approved biotech
ingredients, or reformulate to remove these ingredients too if they do
not wish to label.

U.S. bulk agricultural exports to the UK have also felt the impact of
the increased EU regulation surrounding biotechnology in recent years.
That said, while the headline figures read that in 2004 just \$133
million of goods were traded compared to \$272 million in 1998, with
more than half of this drop accounted for by reduced soybean sales
alone, one must be careful not to jump to conclusions. Much of this drop
has been due to increased competition from Brazil and Argentina, albeit
itself partly boosted by their previous biotech-free status, and a shift
towards imports of further processed products such as soymeal.

While the UK must enforce the EU's regulatory regime on biotechnology,
the UK Government itself continues to back biotechnology policy based on
sound science. However, because of the effectiveness of environmental
campaign groups and the media frenzy created by this issue, the public
remains suspicious of biotechnology largely due to perceived
environmental and food safety concerns. This is despite a large amount
of research undertaken by, and on behalf of, the UK government in the
area of biotechnology over the past few years. From a scientific
perspective, the results of various pieces of research announced in
CY2003 and early 2004 would have been expected to have tempered the
furor. However, this has not been the case and UK consumers are yet to
be convinced of the merits of the technology.

# Production

There are currently no genetically modified (GM) crops being
commercially grown in the UK and it is not expected that this situation
will change until 2008 at the earliest.

Margaret Beckett, the UK's Secretary of State for Environment, Food and
Rural Affairs, made a statement to Parliament on 9 March 2004 setting
out the Government\'s overall policy on GM crops, including its policy
on the commercial cultivation of GM crops. She indicated that the UK
Government had concluded that there was no scientific case for a blanket
ban on the cultivation of GM crops in the UK, but that proposed uses
need to be assessed for safety on a case-by-case basis. The statement
continued by saying that the UK Government will continue to take a
precautionary approach and only agree to the commercial release of a GM
crop if the evidence shows that it does not pose an unacceptable risk to
human health and the environment:

<http://www.defra.gov.uk/corporate/ministers/statements/mb040309.htm>

The UK Government\'s policy statement followed an evaluation of
information available at the time including the reports of the UK's GM
Dialogue. This comprised three strands consisting of a public debate run
by an independent steering board, a review of the science led by the
Government\'s Chief Scientific Adviser and the Chief Scientific Adviser
to the Secretary of State for the Environment, Food and Rural Affairs in
conjunction with an independent panel of academics, and a study into the
overall costs and benefits of GM crops by the Government\'s Strategy
Unit.

Of particular note is that while one aspect of the research undertaken
saw the UK Government announce that commercial planting of a biotech
maize variety, Chardon LL, could go ahead in the UK, the strict set of
pre-conditions led to the company involved, Bayer, announcing that it
would not be making the seed available.

# Policy

## General

British policy on biotechnology focuses on GM organisms in field crops
and foods. This policy seeks to take a science-based approach to the
regulatory process, but has been severely influenced by public anxieties
about the technology

PM Blair acknowledges public concerns about biotechnology, but does not
share the fears of many of his countrymen. In the face of relentless
negative publicity from the media and NGOs, however, he has had little
choice but to pursue a cautious, case-by-case policy for introducing
commercial use of the technology in the UK.

With the EU policy agenda and rules being set in Brussels, the UK works
hard to ensure that science is an important ingredient in the process,
but in the end the UK must abide by the EU-wide legislation.

## Responsibility

The UK falls under the EU's regulatory regime for biotechnology.
However, within the UK, responsibility for biotechnology policy is
divided among a number of Government Departments and advisory bodies:

-   The Health and Safety Executive (HSE) regulate GMOs in contained use
    (e.g. in a laboratory)

-   Department for Environment, Food & Rural Affairs (Defra)

    -   the GM Policy, Science and Regulation Unit - part of the
        Chemicals and GM Policy Division within the Environmental
        Protection section of Defra - is responsible for the control of
        the deliberate release of genetically modified organisms (GMOs)
        in England (note that in Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland
        this falls to the devolved administrations), developing national
        GM policy and turning EU directives into national law,
        representing the UK in EU and international negotiations on the
        environmental safety of GMOs, commissioning and disseminating
        scientific research on GM and assessing the environmental risk
        of the contained use of GMOs

    -   the Plant Varieties and Seeds Unit control the authorization of
        GM seeds for the National Seed List

-   The Food Standards Agency (FSA) controls the assessment of GM food
    for human consumption

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   The Advisory Committee on Releases to the Environment (ACRE), an
    independent scientific committee whose members include leading
    academic scientists, advises the relevant UK Ministers and other
    bodies on the possible environmental and human health implications
    of all experimental and commercial releases of GMOs

-   Additionally, the Advisory Committee on Novel Foods and Processes
    (ACNFP) and the Advisory Committee on Animal Feedingstuffs (ACAF),
    similar in construction to ACRE, advise the relevant UK Ministers on
    GMOs that will be specifically used in food or animal feed

## International

Defra's GM Policy, Science & Regulation Unit deals with international
initiatives concerned with GMOs, including work undertaken by the
Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) on
biotechnology and work on biosafety undertaken by the United Nations
Environment Programme (UNEP). It also takes the UK lead on the
negotiation and implementation of international legislation and treaties
relating to GMOs, such as the Cartagena Protocol, the EU proposal on the
transboundary movement of GMOs and the EU proposal on the traceability
and labeling of GMOs.

## Approvals

At present there are only a few GMOs licensed for release under part C
of Directive 2001/18/EC, this section being for release for marketing
purposes. These include, for example, carnations, oilseed rape and
maize. GMOs that have consent for release under Part B of the directive
are for research and development purposes. Up-to-date UK lists of Part B
and Part C applications are available at:

<http://www.defra.gov.uk/environment/gm/regulation/registers.htm>

## Research

The UK Government is committed to making decisions concerning
developments in GM technology on the basis of sound scientific evidence.
As such, it runs a GM research program which commissions research
designed to underpin the risk assessment of GMOs and their use in the
UK.

Full details of the UK's significant research program is available at:

<http://www.defra.gov.uk/environment/gm/research/index.htm>

As far as field testing of biotechnology crops is concerned, despite
determined and repeated attempts by anti-biotech activists to disrupt
and destroy test plots, recent years have seen GM crops being grown for
research and development purposes at a number of sites in the UK. The
main example of this has been the well-publicized Farm Scale Evaluation
(FSE) GM crop trials, the largest of their kind in the world, which
studied the effects on the diversity and abundance of farmland wildlife
associated with the farmers\' management of GM herbicide tolerant crops
as compared with equivalent non-GM crops.

## Coexistence

The UK Government has stated that it recognizes that transfer of GM
presence into non-GM crops could affect the economic interests of non-GM
growers and that therefore the co-existence of any future GM cropping
and non-GM crops needs to be addressed. As such, it is currently in the
process of developing these co-existence arrangements in consultation
with stakeholders. The UK has stated that their intention is that
farmers growing GM crops should apply measures that aimed to minimize GM
presence in a non-GM crop, and to at least below the European Union\'s
0.9% labeling threshold on a worst case basis. Defra is consulting
stakeholders on this and the following related issues:

-   whether a GM threshold below 0.9% might apply for organic production

-   options for a mechanism to compensate non-GM farmers if they suffer
    financially because a GM presence in their crop exceeds the
    statutory threshold, and

-   guidance for farmers interested in establishing voluntary GM-free
    zones

It remains the Government\'s published intention to introduce
co-existence measures before any commercial cultivation of GM crops
takes place in the UK. Given that no commercial cultivation is expected
in the UK before 2008 at the earliest, an early resolution appears
unlikely.

## Traceability & Labeling

The UK Government's stated position is that it supports labeling rules
that are practical, proportionate and enforceable and in line with its
international obligations. Labeling of GM products has been required in
the UK since 1999. However, these domestic requirements were superceded
by the two EU Regulations covering traceability and labeling of
genetically modified organisms (GMOs) which were implemented in the UK,
as other Member States, on 18 April 2004. These are:

-   Regulation (EC) No 1830/2003 concerning the traceability and
    labeling of genetically modified organisms (GMOs)

-   Regulation (EC) No 1829/2003 on GM food and feed

The Food Standards Agency (FSA) formally leads on the enforcement of
traceability and labeling.

As a result of labeling rules and in response to the pervasive negative
image of biotechnology, all UK supermarkets and big brand food
manufacturers have reformulated their food products to remove biotech
ingredients. In the past, this effectively meant no biotech labeled
products were to be found on UK shelves. However, the tightness of the
new traceability and labeling regulations has led a number of the small,
single brand, products to go ahead and label for biotech content and,
contrary to the assertions of the anti-biotech lobby, there has been no
discernable consumer backlash. That said, the number of labeled products
is very limited and until supermarkets start to widely stock products
with a biotech content, which they say they will do if their consumers
demand it, the effective de facto ban on biotech food in the UK, and
consequent lack of consumer choice, will remain.

# Marketing

Anti-biotech campaign groups have been relentless in their opposition to
agricultural biotechnology and were initially successful in ensuring the
UK media were widely critical of this technology. However, substantial
work on the part of the industry and scientific community means that
this same media are now increasingly split on the issue with much of the
quality press taking a more science based and balanced approach.

The UK's Food Standards Agency (FSA), which routinely tracks GM-related
public opinion, has consistently found that most consumers are
suspicious of GM food and concerned about potentially adverse
environmental impacts of GM. On the other hand, these concerns are not
entrenched, suggesting that the public lacks sufficient understanding of
the issue, and it does not appear to necessarily influence their
purchases, price appearing to be the main driver.

As far as the UK Government is concerned, they have tried to frame the
debate in ways that focus on the overwhelmingly positive scientific
assessment of the safety and effectiveness of GM crops and foods.

However, it is widely believed by industry and Government alike that
until biotech products with a discernable positive advantage for
consumers are available then suspicion will remain.

# Capacity Building

The State Department's Voluntary Visitors Program has been extensively
used to take groups of UK decision makers and opinion formers to the
U.S. on biotech-specific visits. Similarly, State Department funding has
also been utilized to provide informed U.S. speakers for conferences and
events in the UK. MAP funding has been used by the American Soybean
Association (ASA) and others to fund various UK specific work including
speaker tours and meetings with key officials.

# Reference Material

Department for Environment, Food & Rural Affairs

<http://www.defra.gov.uk/environment/gm/index.htm>

Food Standards Agency

<http://www.food.gov.uk/gmfoods/>