A very large number of countries (more than 30 spread over every continent: America, Asia, Africa and the Pacific Rim) [1] are already developing genetically-edited plants based on new genomic techniques (NGTs). In an international race for innovation, these new created varieties are better able to cope with climate change (tolerance to drought or flooding, delayed flowering), or to better defend themselves against pest insects and diseases, or to develop new nutritional properties (biofortification). This is not only to find solutions to make each national farming more resilient, but also to gain market share in this highly competitive segment [2, 3].
This thirst for developing new products has been made possible in these various countries by reducing the national regulations which are applied to genetically modified organisms (GMOs) for NGT’s products. As we all know about it, these GMOs regulations are not only very costly because of technological matter (mainly transgenesis) but also because of the costs involved in introducing precautionary measures at a time (1990-2000) when scientific knowledge was less advanced than it is today. The progress made in genetic modifications through genomic editing, which (1) is lighter to implement, (2) more precise in the results obtained and (3) less costly to carry out, fully justifies a reduction in the regulatory measures to be observed.
The long road to the European revision: the trialogue will conclude at the end
The European Union (EU), whose Court of Justice (EUJC) classified all plant products derived from NGTs as GMOs (i.e. governed by Directive 2001/18) in 2018, is presently continuing the procedure initiated in 2019 by the European Council to change NGTs regulation. Indeed, faced with an outcry from many players in all sectors (economic, scientific, agricultural and industrial), the Council came out in favour of a revision of European regulations for only certain plant products derived from NGTs. Six years on, this process is still under way, but it is on the point of coming to a successful conclusion ‘very soon’, as the saying goes, with the conclusion of a dedicated ‘trialogue’.
The trialogue is the final stage in this long process. It brings together representatives of the European Parliament, the Council of the European Union and the European Commission for a final inter-institutional negotiation. Numerous informal technical committees are currently exchanging arguments to develop the final version of the regulation, which will be adopted at a formal decision-making meeting.
Main stages of a long and fighting procedure
The revision of regulation for NGT is a long procedure that involved several stages, including scientific studies and public enquiries, which were subjected of intense lobbying and tricky obstructions including a duly identified cyber-attack involving MEPs belonging to the political group Green/European Free Alliance (4). Despite these twists, four years later, on 5 July 2023, the European Commission published a proposal to amend the legislation (5). Then, this draft new regulation was debated by the European Parliament’s ENVI (Environment) Committee, which adopted it on 24 January 2024 by 47 votes in favour, 4 abstentions and 31 votes against (in favour of maintaining the current regulation according to Directive 2001/18). As a result, the text continued its parliamentary journey and was forwarded to the plenary session of the European Parliament for a decision.
The final text entitled ‘Plants obtained by certain new genomic techniques and their food and feed’ was adopted at the plenary session on 7 February 2024 by 307 votes ‘in favour’, 263 ‘against’ and 41 abstentions (6). This favourable vote came despite the obstructionist actions of several adverse MEPs, who tabled a barrage of amendments at each level – over 1,200 in the ENVI Committee alone (7) !
Under these conditions, the initial text proposed by the Commission and the one adopted by the Parliament [which I have previously analysed in this journal (5,6,7)] showed significant differences. Negotiations began in following between Parliament and States members within the European Council in order to get a consensus. Such a consensus was difficult to be reached but they eventually came to an agreement in March 2025… however less than three months later, some MEPs disputed it. As a result, the European Parliament suspended the final round of inter-institutional negotiations in the trialogue on 28 June 2025. There are still significant differences of opinion between the Parliament and the Member States regarding the scope of genetic modifications to be authorised under lighter regulations, regarding also the rules on traceability and labelling for consumers as well as the patentability of genetically edited plants (8) as also well noted in the UEAA position paper recently published (9).
By way of conclusion…
Let us wait and see what happens next in this European soap opera, which is continuing in Brussels before concluding after the final decisions of the trialogue when eventually taken. Let us hope that the new European regulations that will apply to plant NGTs, with all the restrictions already announced, will finally enable the EU to join in the global train of progress in genetic editing for plant breeding!
Acknowledgements to Prof Michel Thibier for his kind proofreading of the English version of this article
References
- Genetic Literacy Project GLP : Gene Editing and New Breeding Techniques:
Regulations, Ratings and Index https://crispr-gene-editing-regs-tracker.geneticliteracyproject.org/#jet-tabs-control-1401 - Catherine Regnault-Roger (2022), Enjeux biotechnologiques, Presses des Mines, 204 pages
- Catherine Regnault-Roger (2024), Biotech Challenges, Springer Nature, 157 pages
- Catherine Regnault-Roger (2023), Modifications ciblées du vivant : il est temps de modifier la réglementation. The European Scientist , 01.03.2023 Modifications ciblées du vivant : il est temps de modifier la réglementation
- Catherine Regnault-Roger (2023) NGT : La commission européenne pratique le « en même temps » The European Scientist , 11.07.2023, NGT : La Commission européenne pratique le « En même temps »
- Catherine Regnault-Roger (2024) NGT : le « oui mais » du Parlement européen The European Scientist, 11.07.2023 27.03.2024 NGT : le « oui mais » du Parlement européen…
- Catherine Regnault-Roger (2024) « NGT : un vote en faveur du progrès biotechnologique agricole » Catherine Regnault-Roger interview , The European Scientist 26.01.2024 “NGT : un vote en faveur du progrès biotechnologique agricole” Catherine Regnault Roger (Interview)
- María Simón Arboleas et Sofía Sánchez Manzanaro (2025) El Parlamento Europeo carga contra Bruselas por «marginarlo» en las negociaciones sobre «edición genética», Euractiv 28.06.25, https://euractiv.es/section/agriculture-food/news/meps-pull-plug-on-gene-editing-talks-blame-council-for-deadlock/
- UEAA (2025) Position Paper on Parliament and Council Proposals on Plants Obtained by Certain New Genomic Techniques and Their Food and Feed 17 04 25 https://ueaa.info/wp-content/uploads/2025/04/UEAA-Position-Paper-on-NGT.pdf
Further reading
Reviving Africa’s Indigenous Crops: A Key to Fighting Hunger and Climate Change
Will the EU put a super-plough before soil conservation goals?
“It is time to review the EU’s outdated rules on GMOs” (Interview)
This post is also available in: FR (FR)