Switzerland paves the way for genome editing

Following in the footsteps of the UK, Switzerland wants to exempt genome editing and targeted mutagenesis in plant breeding from the Swiss Genetic Engineering Act. Following the Swiss Council of States, the Swiss Parliament (National Council) has now also decided to allow exemptions for genome editing in plant breeding, provided that precision breeding offers advantages over conventional breeding. In December 2021, the Council of States called on not to apply the moratorium on genetic engineering from 2003 to precision breeding. Now, the Parliament, however,  asked the Swiss, Federal Council to draft a bill by mid-2024 that would regulate how a risk-based authorisation of precision breeding could look. In contrast to the Federal Council , the Parliament aims not to issue a blanket authorisation.

This risk-based authorisation is to apply "to plants, plant parts, seeds and other plant propagating material for agricultural, horticultural or forestry purposes, which have been bred using methods of new breeding technologies, to which no transgenic genetic material has been inserted and which have a proven added value for agriculture, the environment or consumers compared to conventional breeding methods". That there will be such an authorisation regulation in the near future is therefore no longer a question. Only the exact form of the regulation will still be a matter of dispute.

The Swiss Greens had already made it clear last year that biological mutagenesis, in which, in contrast to classical GMOs, no foreign DNA is introduced into the plant, would fall under genetic engineering law. There must be no exceptions and thus no genetic engineering through the back door, but consumers must be clearly informed about the production methods of agricultural products so that they can choose freely.  Scientists working in plant breeding and seed companies, on the other hand, had stressed that the mutations in the DNA of genome-edited plants could not be distinguished from those that had been inserted by chance by means of chemical or radiation mutagenesis. Precision breeding, however, allowed a much faster and more targeted mutation of genes associated with agronomically desirable traits.

According to Urs Niggli, former head of the Research Institute of Organic Agriculture (FIBL), the coexistence of genome-edited and organic breeding is virtually impossible in small-scale Swiss agriculture. Markus Ritter, President of the Swiss Farmers’ Union and himself an organic farmer, said farmers were pragmatists and would discuss the use of genome editing. At the same time, they would be careful not to take a special path within the EU. In April last year, the European Commission commissioned a study to prove the theoretical possibility of breeding plants adapted to global warming more quickly. Recently, the Commission drastically reduced the maximum permissible amount of pesticides in order to make "more sustainable agriculture" possible. From the point of view of conventional farmers, the new limit is set so low that they will have to reckon with yield losses. GMOs that require less pesticide use have been promoted by agro-giants for some time. The same should be possible with precision breeding.

"Practical and innovation-friendly regulations for new genetic technologies for all areas of application can represent an important locational advantage for Switzerland in the European and international competition for innovation," the Swiss business association scienceindustries is pleased to say. It calls for the "focus in the approval of new varieties to be placed on the verifiable product properties rather than on the breeding technologies used"; this would facilitate controls and enforcement by regulating comparable products in a similar way, regardless of the production method. Such a regulation would nullify the labelling obligation provided for in the genetic engineering legislation.