A new paper from the University of Adelaide focuses on the regulation of gene editing in agriculture, emphasizing the importance of clear regulations to ensure the safe and responsible use of new technologies, even though some scientists consider existing rules overly strict.
The commentary, published in The Plant Journal and authored by Dr Emily Buddle, Michail Ivanov, and Professor Rachel Ankeny, argues that regulation plays a crucial role in the innovation process by encouraging public engagement and building trust in emerging genetic technologies.
Dr Buddle explains that regulatory decisions involve not only scientific facts or economic benefits but also value judgments, particularly regarding safety, risk, and societal benefit. Plant scientists need to engage early and frequently with diverse groups during innovation to understand their concerns about new technologies — a mutual learning process, as no single group can set regulations alone.
Dr Buddle also notes that while gene editing can produce changes identical to those occurring naturally in agriculture ("scientific equivalence"), this does not automatically mean public acceptance. What the public truly cares about is how the technology is applied and the benefits it delivers, not whether it is gene editing or genetic modification. For example, studies show people may be more accepting of gene editing to improve drought tolerance in crops than to alter the nutritional profile of grains.
Gene editing, as an emerging agricultural technology, is increasingly used to help crops withstand environmental stresses such as drought and salinity. While commercial production of gene-edited plants has not yet been realized in Australia, the development of new breeding techniques has sparked a global debate about how these technologies should be regulated. Regulation includes laws, policies, permits, and guidelines governing the use of gene technology by individuals and organizations, with penalties for non-compliance — and regulatory approaches to gene editing vary widely worldwide.
In Australia, gene technologies (including GM crops and gene-edited crops) are regulated by the Office of the Gene Technology Regulator (OGTR). Under the Gene Technology Act 2000, gene-edited crops were initially treated the same as genetically modified organisms, but 2019 amendments excluded organisms modified using SDN-1 techniques (small, targeted DNA changes without introducing foreign genetic material) from regulation, as these changes are considered similar to those occurring naturally or through conventional breeding.
Ivanov says the commentary challenges some common criticisms in crop science. Scientists working in agricultural genomics often view regulation as a "bottleneck" or "barrier" to research and innovation, but Ivanov argues that regulation is an essential part of the innovation process. It allows regulators and diverse public stakeholders to participate in research, assessing whether new technologies are truly needed, desirable, and beneficial beyond the lab or field. Regulation is not a "bottleneck" but a "filter" — helping eliminate scientific and innovative elements that could cause societal or environmental problems, ensuring new technologies align with societal expectations and values before widespread adoption.
