International Approaches to the Labeling of Genetically Modified Foods

The United States accounts for two thirds of bioengineered crops produced globally. Other major suppliers include Argentina, Canada, and China. More than 20% of the global crop acreage of soybeans, corn, cotton, and canola is now biotech varieties (International Service for the Acquisition of Agri-biotech Applications, 2003). In addition, biotech ingredients and biotech processes are used in producing a wide selection of food and beverage products such as meat, poultry, cheese, milk, and beer. The United States first exported genetically modified (GM) food to Europe in 1996. It was tomato puree from California, and it was voluntarily labeled as genetically engineered. The product was a big hit with consumers in Britain, because it was cheaper than conventional tomato puree. However, when GM soybeans were imported into Europe later that year, there was a huge backlash from environmental groups such as Greenpeace. The European Union (EU) was then quick to introduce mandatory labeling, which took hold in 1997, for GM foods. The US government viewed the European mandatory labeling policy as a trade barrier, and so began another US-EU agricultural trade dispute that is still ongoing. This transatlantic trade dispute has spread to many other countries. Governments around the world are developing GM labeling requirements, and they are finding themselves caught between the US and the EU approaches. Consumers are confused about what exactly GM foods are and whether these foods are harmful. Scientists have determined that precommercialization assessment procedures of bioengineered food ensure that GM food is nutritionally equivalent and as safe as conventional food (e.g., the World Health Organization, 2000). However, in Europe consumers do not necessarily trust scientists, especially after they were told in the mid-1990s that humans could not get mad cow disease. The GM labeling issue is not just about science. Rather, the politicians and environmental groups in Europe and elsewhere say GM labeling is about consumer choice and consumer rights, and is not even a health issue. The Europeans are clearly taking a precautionary approach. Alternatively, the United States, Canada, and Japan are using sciencebased risk assessment procedures. The purpose of this article is to discuss international approaches to GM labeling and to shed some light on why the approaches vary so much across nations.