Keywords

1 Plant Breeding Has a Track Record to Contribute to Sustainability

Plant breeding involves processes by which new technologies and findings from plant sciences and other research domains are transformed into improved plant varieties. Plant breeding has strongly contributed to increased yields and production in arable farming, and subsequently to improved market and trade conditions, increased food availability, higher economic prosperity and additional farm income while avoiding additional land use, greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, and loss of biodiversity [1].

Scientists have shown for instance for wheat, which is a major staple food around the world, that resistance breeding can contribute to achieving the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) [2]. They were able to show that resistance breeding in wheat has increased crop production, and hence the economic profitability due to a reduction in the use of fungicides. Another study could verify that five decades of wheat breeding progress in western Europe has enhanced cultivar performance not only under optimal production conditions but also in production systems with reduced agrochemical inputs. New cultivars incrementally accumulated genetic variants conferring favourable effects on key yield parameters, disease resistance, nutrient use efficiency, photosynthetic efficiency, and grain quality [3].

Europe’s seed sector is committed to delivering on the SDGs (2, 3, 8, 9, 12, 13 and 15) by improving the sustainability of food production, by maintaining and promoting Europe’s high food quality and standards, by ensuring that the European agri-food sector can remain fair and competitive, and by contributing to Europe’s climate, environmental and biodiversity goals. The European Union (EU) Farm to Fork (F2F) strategy includes several policy objectives that have implications for agricultural production in the EU and beyond.

Plant breeding in the EU contributes to socio-economic and environmental sustainability and can partially compensate production losses potentially resulting from the implementation of the EU F2F and Biodiversity strategies [4]. Policy makers seem to have implicitly concluded that the additional net benefits resulting from the EU F2F and Biodiversity Strategies outweigh the losses in production surplus. But studies do not support this claim without further technological and institutional changes, such as supporting the application of modern biotechnology by reducing regulatory hurdles for plant-based innovations [5]. Modern plant breeding including biotechnological tools must be enabled to provide farmers more efficiently with improved plant varieties to sustainably secure their productivity [1].

2 The Ever-Evolving Plant Breeders’ Toolbox

Like evolution itself plant breeding depends upon genetic variability within crops and their relatives as a basis for develo** new plant varieties with improved characteristics. For thousands of years, humans have been improving crops to suit better their needs. Conventional plant breeding methods, transgenesis or newer plant breeding methods are all important components of the plant breeders’ toolbox (Fig. 28.1). By building on the mechanisms created by nature, most of the latest innovations in plant breeding methods simply reduce the complexity of breeding and achieve the relevant breeding goals in less time and with greater precision.

Fig. 28.1
An infographic is titled, Plant Breeding Innovation as Part of the Breeding Cycle. The decreasing variation includes selection, field trials, and the release of new varieties. The increasing variation indicates induced genetic variation, germplasm input, and crosses.

Integration of new plant breeding tools into the breeding cycle. Plant breeding depends upon genetic variability within crops and their relatives as a basis for develo** new plant varieties with improved characteristics. Plant breeders are continuously integrating the latest methods in plant biology and genetics into their breeding toolbox to efficiently use existing diversity but also to induce new genetic variation. Over the past years ever more precise and efficient plant breeding methods have been developed. This plant breeding innovation leap is based on an in-depth understanding of plant genomes and refinement of breeding methods, enabling more efficient, more precise, and faster progress in achieving the desired breeding goals

Full size image

3 The Role of New Breeding Techniques According to the European Seed Sector

The targeted development of improved plant varieties is important to mitigate climate change effects like new plant pests or diseases. These can be devastating to crops and lead to huge pre-harvest losses. Other new plant varieties provide quality improvements, such as better taste (e.g., in fruits and vegetables), processing advantages or nutritional enhancements, such as desirable proteins or lower saturated fats. In addition, New Genomic Techniques (NGTs) -such as genome editing- are technologies that could also facilitate the improvement of so-called orphan species that have benefitted little from innovations in genetic selection as well as the domestication of related wild species thus increasing the genetic diversity within crop species [6].

The results of a survey among 62 private plant breeding companies conducted by Euroseeds highlights the enormous interest of companies in using NGTs for a wide range of crop species and traits and the negative impact of the current regulatory situation in the EU on companies’ decisions for investments in NGT-related research and development (R&D) activities for the EU market and beyond [7].

The Commission study on NGTs [8] confirmed that plants resulting from NGTs have the potential to contribute to a more sustainable food system as part of the objectives of the European Green Deal and the F2F Strategy. At the same time, the study found that the current genetically modified organism (GMO) legislation, adopted in 2001, is not fit for purpose for these innovative technologies. This was also confirmed by the results of the public consultation conducted by the Commission as part of the impact assessment to draft a policy proposal. Almost 80% of the participants who responded to the consultation acknowledged that the current regulatory framework is not adequate for plants resulting from targeted mutagenesis and cisgenesis [9].

4 Communication Practices and Needs for Plant Breeding Innovation

The EU-funded Horizon 2020 project CropBooster-P assessed European stakeholders’ information and communication behaviour on plant genome editing including survey results of a total of 100 respondents from the seed and plant breeding sector [10].

The most referred crop characteristics communicated about by breeders and seed and plant breeding organisations relate to yield and yield stability. This suggests that communication about economic aspects of crop production and economic sustainability of farmers (as the customers of new seeds) are of utmost importance. Breeders and seed and plant breeding organisations stressed the importance to communicate safety as well as sustainability aspects in future efforts (Fig. 28.2). This does not necessarily imply that safety communication is a consequence of a risk-focused approach. For breeders, safety and quality are important because seeds are at the basis of food safety and health requirements related to crops that are grown for food, feed, and bio-based production [11].

Fig. 28.2
A horizontally stacked bar graph plots 10 topics versus the percentage values of their rankings. The highest ranks are as follows. Extremely important, safety. Very important, quality. Important, labeling. Slightly important, fair competition. Not important at all, food loss and waste.

Ranking of topics for future communication efforts by breeders and seed and plant breeding organisations. N = 94

Full size image

The potential benefits, examples of applications, and comparisons of genome editing and conventional breeding methods were identified as the most important topics to communicate about NGTs. This indicates that the ongoing policy discussions in Europe about a differentiated regulatory framework for plants resulting from targeted mutagenesis and cisgenesis resonate with breeders.

Finally, respondents could share in the survey examples of communication relating to plant research, crop improvement and breeding or crop production which, in their experience was effective. The answers were thematically analysed to identify recurring topics, which are depicted in the word cloud below (Fig. 28.3). Most shared experiences by the seed and plant breeding sector are explaining the basics of plant breeding and its benefits to consumers and primary producers as well as providing specific examples (e.g., the need to reduce pesticide use) and engaging with interested stakeholders on field days and participatory events.

Fig. 28.3
A word cloud. The labels from the biggest to smallest fonts are as follows. Specific examples, participatory events, basics of plant breeding, field days, less dependent on pesticides, benefits to consumers, social media, and benefits to producers.

Word cloud of examples for effective communication based upon the free text answers in the survey from breeders and seed and plant breeding organisations

Full size image

5 A Multitude of Collaborations in the Seed Sector

The seed and plant breeding sector engages with many different stakeholders as R&D activities take place along the value -and process chains from the field to the shop counter to meet the challenging and ever-evolving needs of farmers and other actors of the agri-food value chain, including consumer preferences and policy objectives. In addition, cooperation between companies, public research institutes and other actors is important to address research needs and gaps in crop improvement strategies. A multi-stakeholder perspective on the role of crop improvement in future-proofing the European food system was developed in the CropBooster-P project, which revealed that for instance examining downstream sustainability impacts will be valuable to identify concrete targets for plant breeding innovation as a food systems solution [12].

COST actions are interdisciplinary research networks that bring together researchers and innovators from academia, small and medium-sized enterprises, public institutions, and other relevant organisations or interested parties to investigate a topic of their choice for 4 years [13]. The COST Action PlantEd has been a unique platform for multi-stakeholder engagement on the topic of plant genome editing [14]. The multi-actor approach put forward in H2020 and Horizon Europe research programmes, helps to facilitate the involvement of the seed and plant breeding sector in research projects to co-develop solutions, which could be more readily applied in.

Sustainability, safety-related aspects, and transparency appear to be the most important topics for communication about plant genome editing by the surveyed stakeholders in the CropBooster-P project [10]. These stakeholders include academia, farmers, seed and breeding sector, environmental and consumer organisations, journalists, and policy makers. The topic of sustainability is primarily addressed in a supportive manner for NGTs [10]. However, environmental organisations prefer to use rejective or neutral argumentation in communication about sustainability in the context of plant genome editing applications. Interestingly, respondents from consumer organisations address the topic impartially, presumably because no genome-edited products have been released on the European market yet [10].

The survey results suggest that focussing on sustainability in future communication activities might increase the opportunity to agree on shared values among different agri-food stakeholders. This is in line with the results of another survey where a majority of those surveyed at farm-level (70%), consumer-level (66%), and plant scientist (60%) respondents to the survey chose sustainability as the most important aim for crop improvement in Europe [11]. Sustainability could thus provide a good starting point for constructive discussions about the regulatory framework in Europe. This recommendation is supported by the outcome of two citizen juries with consumer experts and societal stakeholders. They concluded that the awareness of NGTs by society might be increased when their application serves goals with a societal dimension such as environmental sustainability, resilience, and quality [15, 16].

6 It’s Time to Act

Europe’s seed sector, technology developers and public researchers have been contributing to the development of improved plant breeding methods. The private seed sector is highly innovative and invests an average of 20% and up to 30% of its turnover in R&D of improved plant varieties [7]. Each year more than 4000 new varieties are registered for cultivation in the EU [17]. In addition, plant breeding has a proven track record for supporting sustainable agricultural production and NGTs can provide additional sustainability options by increasing efficiency and reducing complexity in plant breeding. Communicating the benefits of plant breeding, and the potential of NGTs specifically, can be a starting point for a constructive public dialogue.

NGT applications are versatile and can be used in the development of a wide range of different plant varieties. While NGTs may for some purposes be used to introduce a transgene and consequently result in a transgenic organism (transgenes are DNA fragments outside the plant species’ gene pool) [18], many other types of NGT-derived plants, e.g. those derived from targeted mutagenesis and cisgenesis, are similar to those that could occur in nature or be produced by conventional breeding methods [18], e.g. by induced random mutagenesis or backcross breeding. The European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) [19] concluded that certain plants obtained by targeted mutagenesis and cisgenesis do not pose any new hazards compared to plants developed by conventional breeding.

Plant varieties developed through the latest breeding methods should therefore not be subject to different or additional regulations if they could also be obtained through earlier breeding methods or result from spontaneous processes in nature [20].

Worldwide, there is a growing number of countries that implement differentiating and enabling policy approaches for NGTs. Their regulatory decisions consider the genetic characteristics of the genome edited organism, and whether the changes introduced in its genome can (or cannot) occur naturally [21]. One of the most recent examples of such enabling policies is the United Kingdom (UK) Precision Breeding Act. [22]. The bill excludes precision bred organisms from the GMO legislation and aims to encourage agricultural and scientific innovation in the UK and could unlock the potential of new technologies like genome editing to promote sustainable and efficient farming and food production. EU agriculture and some other of the EU’s most innovative sectors are at risk of being deprived of scientific progress, putting them at a competitive disadvantage compared to their counterparts in other countries.

Therefore, Europe should join the increasing number of countries that pursue a differentiated and efficient regulatory approach. The future legislation must provide clarity through principal definitions and unambiguous criteria that allow to clearly determine whether plants resulting from certain NGTs fall into the same category as conventionally bred plants (and thus should be regulated alike) or constitute GMOs according to the respective regulatory framework.

The regulatory framework for GMOs in the EU (2001/18) is unworkable, specifically for SMEs which constitute 90% of the EU’s seed and breeding sector [7]. The lengthy and costly procedures risk neutralizing any efficiency gains in breeding. Currently a GMO import approval takes more than 5 years between application and approval of the GMO dossier, the last and the only cultivation approval that realized into GMO cultivation in the EU dates to the end of the 1990ies. That makes it unattractive for companies to invest in those technologies. Under such conditions, NGTs will not deliver on the goals of the F2F and Biodiversity strategies.

Consequently, Europe’s leading position in innovative breeding is at stake, as are the EU’s sustainability goals, jobs in agriculture, their associated value chains, and international trade flows.