France is set for an explosion in GM corn planting this year,
according to a recent USDA GAIN report.
The Global Agriculture Information Network (GAIN) study said
that French Bt corn acreage is expected to boom from 500 ha
in 2005 to 5,000 ha in 2006, as a result of the economic advantages
experienced by Bt corn growers in 2005.
"The pervasive presence of the European corn borer in
Southern France provides strong incentive for further expansion," wrote
Marie-Cecile Henard. "Bt corn is viewed as providing an
effective and profitable remedy against the European corn borer
in this region, which contains 400,000 to 500,000 hectares,
i.e., almost a third of the total French corn acreage."
However, Henard said that this incentive must be weighed against
continued French consumer resistance. This week, Jose Bove
and other high profile opponents of GM crops in France reaffirmed
their commitment to destroy GM fields. According to Bove, around
40 per cent of GM trials were destroyed in the course of seven
acts of sabotage.
But Henard believes that more and more farmers are being won
over by pro-GM arguments. "While the French Biotech Bill
is still pending in the Parliament, farmers are adopting coexistence
practices based on studies by the French corn growers association
(AGPM) and the recommendations of seed companies," she
wrote.
The findings of this pro-GM study suggest that the historical
rejection of GM technology in Europe is on the wane, with consumer
acceptance not far away. The WTO of course famously ruled earlier
this year that Europe had violated its trade rules by banning
GM food imports between 1999 and 2003, a ruling welcomed by
the US food industry that claimed the EU ban has cost them
some $300 million a year in lost sales.
The EU's approach to GM food regulation has long been criticised
on the other side of the Atlantic for having little theoretical
basis, and pandering to the fears and prejudices of its citizens.
The EU's precautionary principle for example, which rules that
regulators should err on the side of caution, assumes that
a prevention strategy is always appropriate.
A recent European Commission (EC) communique reads: 'decision-makers
have to take into account fears generated by these perceptions
and put in place preventative measures'. The pro-GM lobby believes
that overly stringent regulations, based on public perceptions
of danger rather than scientific evidence, have resulted in
the unnecessary rejection of significant new GM-based products.
Last week's GAIN study, following on from the WTO decision,
will therefore be welcomed by this group.
The French pro-GM farm community is also still hoping to receive
some legal clarity in the coexistence area. The French Biotech
Bill, which will set rules on GM and non-GM coexistence was
voted on by the Senate last March but, since May, has been
languishing in the National Assembly.
Coexistence remains a controversial issue and politicians
are wary of acting on this legislation in the current pre-presidential
and Parliamentary campaign period before the elections of May
2007.
Indeed, it is clear that Member States still need to be convinced
that introducing genetically modified ingredients into food
production is acceptable. The Commission has asked EU members
over ten times to vote on authorizing a GMO food or feed product,
but in the large majority of cases, there was no agreement
or simple deadlock.