Required Report - public distribution

**Date:** 8/01/2005

**GAIN Report Number:** CS5013

CS5013

**Costa Rica**

**Biotechnology**

**Annual Report**

**2005**

**Approved by:**

![](media/image1.wmf)Katherine Nishiura, Agricultural Attaché

FAS San Jose

**Prepared by:**

Víctor González, Agricultural Specialist

**Report Highlights:**

Seeds derived from modern biotechnology have been planted for export for
several years in Costa Rica. However, recent high profile activism
against biotechnology has created uncertainty among those involved in
production and research of biotechnology products. Costa Rica signed but
has not ratified the Cartagena Protocol.

Includes PSD Changes: No

Includes Trade Matrix: No

Unscheduled Report

San Jose \[CS1\]

\[CS\]

**SECTION I. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY**

Transgenic varieties have been grown in Costa Rica since 1992. Costa
Rica has implemented legislation to regulate the import and cultivation
of biotech crops. This legislation includes a labeling requirement for
genetically modified organisms in agriculture, but there is currently no
requirement that foods containing the products of biotechnology be
labeled.

Beginning in 2004, environmental groups strengthened their campaign
against the planting of transgenic varieties in Costa Rica. On September
23, a coalition of these groups submitted to the government a petition
to impose a moratorium on the planting of transgenic varieties in Costa
Rica, citing the precautionary principle with respect to both the
environmental impact and the human health impact of biotechnology. On
October 4, 2004, a Presidential decree was published modifying the
composition of the Commission on Biosecurity, which reviews all requests
for approval of new biotech varieties. The Commission now has two
members from an extreme environmentalist coalition and an additional
member from the Environment Ministry. Different parties involved with
biotechnology have expressed concern that the decree has politicized the
Commission, which was once a purely technical body.

Despite the fuss over environmental impact of transgenics last year,
area planted to transgenics is growing, while recent anti-biotechnology
media events have received only moderate press in Costa Rica.

Costa Rica signed the Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety in May 2000, but
has not ratified it. The legislation\'s prospects under the current
legislature, which ends in May 2006, aren\'t clear.

**SECTION II. BIOTECHNOLOGY TRADE AND PRODUCTION**

Costa Rica reproduces genetically modified cotton and soybean seed
entirely for export to the country of origin. The seeds do not stay in
the country for local consumption. Currently, about 1,442 hectares of
soybeans and cotton are planted for the purpose of multiplication of
planting seeds for export to the United States.

The events planted are Roundup Ready, Roundup Ready Flex, Bollgard,
Bollgard II, WideStrike, Cry 1F, Bomoxinil, Liberty Link, Vip 3A and
some combinations of the previous ones, for cotton. For soybeans, only
Roundup Ready is planted. The GOCR has not received any requests to date
for approval to plant transgenic varieties for human or animal food
consumption in Costa Rica.

Costa Rican researchers are working on the development of genetically
modified rice (resistance to virus and herbicides), and bananas
(resistance to black Sigatoka). The development of these products is at
the field trial stage. Although, according to sources familiar with the
research, the most advanced project is in bananas, it is not expected to
come to market during the next year.

Costa Rica imports genetically modified corn and soybeans from the
United States for animal feed production, and a small volume of cotton
for processing. The country is not a recipient of food aid and is not
likely to become a food aid recipient in the near future. Imports of
genetically modified organisms are limited to those indicated above from
the United States.

# SECTION III. BIOTECHNOLOGY POLICY

In 1990, Costa Rica created the National Technical Biosafety Commission
(NTBC), which is attached to the Ministry of Agriculture by law (Animal
and Plant Health Protection Law 7664 of April 1997). The law confers
upon the NTBC power to regulate imports, exports, research, testing,
movement, propagation, industrial production, marketing and use of
transgenic and other genetically modified organisms for agricultural
use.

The Commission had operated as a strictly technical body for years,
however on October 4, 2004, under pressure from groups opposed to
biotechnology, the President modified its composition resulting in the
following membership (new additions in italics): one representative of
the Science and Technology Ministry, two representatives from the
Ministry of Agriculture, two representatives from the Ministry of the
Environment, one representative from the National Seeds Office, two
representatives from the National Academy of Sciences, *one
representative from the Federation for Environmental Conservation, and
one representative from the Biodiversity Conservation Network.*

At this time there is no specific legislation requiring approval of
products of biotechnology for food consumption, feed or processing.
Imports of U.S. grains and soybeans for animal feed production enter
Costa Rica under procedures identical to the importation of any other
agricultural product.

The country allows field tests of biotechnology crops, following
appropriate risk analysis for each particular case.

Cases that present stacked events need to undergo the same risk
evaluation process as the individual events.

Regarding the coexistence of biotechnology and non-biotechnology crops
(including organic agriculture), Executive Decree 29782 -- MAG of
September 18, 2000 (Organic Production Regulation), indicates in Chapter
III, Article 24: "Genetically Modified Organisms or those obtained
through genetic engineering and the products derived from such
organisms, are not compatible with the principles of organic production
(understood as production, processing, manufacture or marketing), and
their use in organic agriculture is not allowed".

There is no law regarding the use of labels such as "biotech free",
"non-biotech", "gmo-free" or "non-gmo" right now. Anti-biotech groups
are pushing for mandatory labeling of food products derived from modern
biotechnology. However, labeling is required to introduce and/or trade
plant products or other genetically modified organisms (gmos) for use in
agriculture in Costa Rica. In this case the product must be identified
as such on a label where the consumer can identify its characteristics.
To date, this requirement has been applied only to labeling of planting
seeds.

Recent media events in Costa Rica have shifted focus from an emphasis on
the environmental impact of biotechnology to the results of
environmentalists' sampling of food products, which purportedly revealed
transgenics in the food supply. Environmentalists are calling for urgent
legislation to ban the import of transgenic grains, and to establish a
labeling system for transgenic foods. Costa Rica imports in excess of
\$100 million in biotech commodities per year. Processed food imports,
many of which contain ingredients derived from biotech commodities, are
growing.

Costa Rica signed the Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety in May 2000, but
has not ratified it. Although the Law to ratify the Protocol has been
introduced to the Legislative Assembly, it is not clear at this point
when it will be voted upon.

There are no biotechnology trade barriers that affect U.S. exports at
this time. Costa Rica is an importer of soybeans and corn (primarily
yellow corn for animal feed production). Imports of processed products
that may contain products of biotechnology are also an important segment
of total agricultural products imported from the United States.

**SECTION IV. MARKETING ISSUES**

Costa Rica is an importer of biotech corn and soybeans from the United
States. There seems to be very little if any concern regarding the
process from which these products are derived, among users (primarily
animal feed producers) or among consumers in the country. The
anti-biotech campaign developed since last year by different groups
under the Federation for Environmental Conservation and the Biodiversity
Conservation Network, has not had a significant negative impact among
consumers. In fact, as a result of these group's statements (which
included at a point a threat to destroy biotech crops), scientists, MAG
officials, and the press have had the opportunity to express points of
view favorable to biotechnology. Nevertheless, the general public has
limited knowledge of the topic and can be easily manipulated by these
groups, especially in rural areas, where the educational level of the
population is lower.

###### SECTION V. CAPACITY BUILDING AND OUTREACH

The U.S. Government funded the visit of biotechnology expert from
University of California, Davis, in June 2005. The expert met with
government officials from the Ministries of Agriculture, Health, Economy
and Environment, as well as with scientists and members of the NTBC, and
discussed different issues related to biotechnology, including the costs
of over regulation. He also made a public presentation at the University
of Costa Rica, which was well attended by students, academics, and
public officials. Interviews were provided to written media and to a
television station, and press coverage was generally science based and
informative. After the visit, an article which expressed many of the
points presented by the speaker in support of biotechnology, was
published by a well-known local scientist in a leading newspaper.