Biosafety Protocol Allows Flow of Biotechnology Benefits

By Mildred Sola Neely
Washington File Staff Writer

Washington -- Under Secretary of State for Global Affairs Frank Loy says that, in the view of the United States, the Biosafety Protocol is a "quite good agreement" because it makes sure that the biotechnology industry will continue to create "what we believe is a beneficial stream of products."

The United States really does believe that, "in a growing world, with decreasing resources of land and water, with the concern about the excessive use of chemicals and pesticides and herbicides, that biotech agriculture has much to offer," particularly for human health and the environment, Loy told members of the Washington International Trade Association on April 12.

Loy added that a U.S. goal was to ensure that an international agreement such as the Biosafety Protocol would not "freeze" research in biotechnology at a time when "there is very much movement in the field, when our learning curve is steep, when different countries are adopting different techniques to try to address the issue."

The Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety was adopted by more than 130 countries January 29 in Montreal, Canada. Once this first protocol to the Convention on Biological Diversity is ratified, it will provide a framework for addressing environmental impacts of bioengineered products - living modified organisms (LMOs) - that cross international borders. Although the United States is not a party to the protocol, it participated in the Montreal negotiations and worked with the Miami Group of agricultural exporting nations to design an accord that would protect the environment without unnecessarily disrupting world food trade.

Loy stressed that the protocol does not deal with pharmaceuticals, but includes "a very substantial exception" allowing the flow of materials for scientific research. It also, he said, creates "a divide" between biotechnology products intended for introduction into the environment, such as seeds for planting and fish for stock, and biotechnology commodities for food and feed. The agreement only requires that bulk shipments of commodities for food or feed be labeled as "may contain" LMOs, he said.

Loy said that the United States believes the protocol will not "mandate changes that would not have been made otherwise," while permitting countries to protect themselves in an informed way from "unintended" and "unwanted consequences" of trade in LMOs. Countries will be better able to make decisions on LMOs because the protocol establishes an Internet-based "Biosafety Clearing-House" to exchange information on these new products, he said. In addition, the protocol establishes an advance informed agreement (AIA) procedure requiring exporters to seek consent from importers before the first shipment of LMOs meant to be introduced into the environment.

Loy said that the protocol does not require the segregation of biotechnology products from the field to the recipient, and that it does not set up an international requirement for consumer labeling, leaving this decision to individual governments.

He emphasized that the protocol does not supersede or alter existing international agreements, such as the World Trade Organization (WTO) accords. The protocol includes a savings clause that states, "this Protocol shall not be interpreted as implying a change in the rights and obligations of a Party under any existing international agreement."

In response to a question regarding European Union claims that the protocol enshrines the so-called "precautionary principle," Loy said that the Cartagena agreement "does not establish a new standard or a science-less standard." According to the State Department, the protocol's language acknowledges the role that precaution may serve during decision making. However, the State Department points out, the language does not replace science-based decision-making, nor does it authorize decisions contrary to a country's WTO obligations.

Previewing the next round of multilateral negotiations for the Kyoto Protocol on climate change, set for November 13-24 at The Hague in the Netherlands, Loy said the participants will have to figure out ways to "globalize commitments" and ensure that developing countries can join developed nations in reducing greenhouse gas emissions without harming economic growth.

Loy said that the United States has no intention of forcing developing nations to sacrifice their growth rates to safeguard the environment. "It would be foolish for us ... immoral for us" to try to reduce the growth of developing countries such as India and China, Loy said.. However, he added, "we would be happy ... to include them in the global process, to include them in the global fight against greenhouse gases .... We think it is possible for them to take on quantified commitments without harming their growth."

Developing countries, Loy added, have the most to fear from the negative effects of global warming. "It is in the interest of the developing world to have a climate change treaty," he said. "They are likely to be hit the worst" by the failure to stop global warming because they do not have the resources to cope with the phenomenon's negative effects. As an example, he pointed to the danger facing the small island nations, which might disappear were sea levels to rise because of global warming.

Developing countries, he said, have a second "powerful" incentive to join in the fight against global warming -- an economic one.

"If we get it right (in the climate change negotiations)," Loy said, "there will be a transfer of technology and resources ... from the developed to the developing world of a magnitude that will probably dwarf official development assistance."

This site is produced and maintained by the U.S. Department of State. Links to other Internet sites should not be construed as an endorsement of the views contained therein.