Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41234556›Full record

ReviewFrontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology2025

Challenges and opportunities in the regulatory landscape of genetically modified crops in the European Union.

Monica Garcia-Alonso, Esteban Alcalde, Ine Criel, Concepción Novillo, Petra Kostolaniova, Nancy Podevin

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Monica Garcia-AlonsoEstel Consult, Bracknell, United Kingdom.
Esteban AlcaldeSyngenta, Brussels, Belgium.
Ine CrielBASF, Ghent, Belgium.
Concepción NovilloBayer, Madrid, Spain.
Petra KostolaniovaCropLife Europe, Brussels, Belgium.
Nancy PodevinCorteva Agriscience, Brussels, Belgium.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Genetically modified (GM) crops, introduced in the mid-1990s, have undergone extensive scientific scrutiny over the past three decades. While initial regulatory frameworks were stringent due to the nascent nature of the technology and uncertainty regarding their safety, subsequent comprehensive research and independent risk assessments have consistently affirmed their safety for human, animal, and environmental health, leading to widespread global adoption. GM crops have demonstrably enhanced agricultural productivity, mitigated environmental impacts associated with conventional farming, and contribute to the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals. Consequently, many nations have refined their regulatory approaches based on accumulated scientific evidence. However, the European Union (EU) presents a contrasting scenario. Despite significant investments in agricultural biotechnology research and a commitment to the Sustainable Development Goals, the EU's regulatory landscape for GM crops has become increasingly complex, effectively limiting European farmers' access to these technologies. The EU heavily relies on imports of GM-containing protein-rich crops, while its farmers cannot benefit from their cultivation. The current pre-market assessment for GM crop import and food and feed use authorization is characterized by its lengthy, costly, and unpredictable nature. This paper discusses some of the issues faced by developers when trying to obtain import approvals for GM crops in the EU and the impact that the current regulatory framework is having on innovation. The authors propose a series of practical and feasible adjustments that could be implemented during the EU's risk assessment process to unlock the benefits of biotechnology for European agriculture without compromising safety standards.

Indexed as

Genetically modified cropsprecautionary principleproportionalityregulatory frameworkright to good administrationrisk assessment

Identifiers

PMID41234556
PMCPMC12605140

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.