This marks the end of the legislative process – but not necessarily the end of the legal debate. Questions remain, including the possibility of legal challenges before the Court of Justice of the European Union and whether the new regulatory framework fully complies with the EU’s and its Member States’ obligations under the Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety.
At the same time, the two-year implementation period has begun. For the Non-GMO sector, this means that the focus must increasingly shift from the legislative debate to a very practical question: How can operators continue to produce, source and certify Non-GMO products credibly under the new regulatory framework?
The information gap for NGT1
The key practical challenge is the emerging information gap for NGT1 plants between seeds and the final product.
The requirements of credible Non-GMO production – and indeed the quality oft he products - will not change, but the information available to operators through the regulatory system will become more limited. While NGT1 seeds will remain identifiable, information along the subsequent supply chain will be much more limited than under the current GMO framework.
This makes it necessary to further develop the systems that enable operators to reliably exclude the use of NGTs so that they can continue to substantiate their Non-GMO production claims.
Three pillars of a credible control system
There is no single instrument that can close this information gap. Instead, a credible Non-GMO system will increasingly have to rely on three complementary pillars:
Analytical methods – robust documentation – supply-chain controls.
Together, these instruments will need to provide operators with a credible basis for maintaining Non-GMO production where mandatory regulatory information is no longer available.
Research into analytical detection is making important progress. EU-funded research projects such as DARWIN and DETECTIVE are working on DNA-based methods, genetic fingerprints and complementary analytical and non-technical traceability approaches.
At the same time, analytical detection alone will not provide all the answers. Supplier declarations, documentation, database and register checks, contractual safeguards and risk-based audits will therefore become increasingly important.
It is not only a question of detection or documentation. But instead, the aim should be to establish a functioning overall system combining both with effective control of the supply chain.
Moving towards risk-based controls
Not every crop, ingredient or supply chain requires the same level of scrutiny. Future control systems will therefore need to become more risk-based.
Relevant criteria could include the relevant crop, country of origin, existing certification, complexity of the supply chain and the availability of analytical methods.
The objective should be proportionate controls: stronger safeguards where the risk of NGT entry or information gaps is higher, without imposing unnecessary requirements on supply chains that are already well documented and secured.
This approach will affect the entire value chain – from agriculture and feed to plant-based ingredients, animal products, processing and retail.
Developing a common European approach
ENGA is already preparing for this new reality. Together with ARGE Gentechnik-frei in Austria and VLOG in Germany, and in close coordination with the organic sector, ENGA is working on the development of a risk-based control approach for the NGT era.
The aim is not simply to add more controls. It is to identify where additional safeguards will actually be needed and how existing instruments – documentation, supplier declarations, certification, audits, database and register checks, contractual requirements and analytical methods – can be combined effectively.
Close coordination between the Non-GMO and organic sectors will be particularly important. Both depend on the ability to reliably exclude NGTs from their supply chains and will face similar challenges as mandatory information along the supply chain becomes more limited.
Different approaches to verification and control, as well as incompatible requirements, would increase complexity and costs and could ultimately weaken the credibility of both Non-GMO and organic production. Wherever possible the two sectors should therefore develop compatible and mutually reinforcing approaches.
At the same time, future requirements must remain workable for farmers, processors, feed and food companies and retailers. The practical experience of operators throughout the value chain will therefore be essential in developing the new approach.
Making the most of the next two years
NGTs will not transform European supply chains overnight. Their relevance will increase gradually. This gives the Non-GMO sector time to prepare and that time should be used well.
The period until July 2028 provides an important window to further develop production, control and certification systems, identify particularly relevant crops, ingredients, origins and trade flows, and test how a risk-based approach can work in practice.
For ENGA, this is a key part of the work ahead: to ensure that credible and workable Non-GMO production remains possible in Europe – and that consumers continue to have a real choice.