No one really knows the possible ramifications, and that is the problem facing hundreds of government ministers, environmentalists and other delegates converging on Montreal to try to agree on regulating trade of genetically engineered plants and animals. The Montreal meeting, Jan. 24-28, is an extension of failed talks 11 months earlier in Cartagena, Colombia, on what is called the Biosafety Protocol. The Cartagena meeting collapsed when the United States, Canada, Australia, Uruguay, Argentina and Chile blocked a draft accepted by 125 other countries. Environmental groups and developing nations accused the United States of protecting its large and growing biotechnology industry by undermining a compromise agreement brokered by the European Union. Distrustful of the powerful U.S. industry's motives, they say the unchecked tampering with nature inherent in gene-splicing has the potential for environmental catastrophe.
Proponents say such arguments ignore the promise and benefits to humanity of scientific advancement.
The true potential of this new technology is in eliminating famine with higher-yield, more resilient crops, they argue. The agreement should cover all genetically modified organisms, including food products and other commodities, or just the minority being introduced into the environment, such as seeds. Free trade rules set up by the World Trade Organization should apply to genetically modified organisms, as favored by the United States. Food products should be labeled to show they include genetically modified ingredients. A mechanism should be set up to assess liability in case of unforeseen problems linked to biotechnology.