Updated Definitions for Genetically Modified Food Approved by FSANZ

Food Standards Australia New Zealand (FSANZ) has approved updated definitions for genetically modified (GM) food in the Australia New Zealand Food Standards Code (the Code), as announced in an official media statement.

Modernization of GM Food Definitions

Following a review under Proposal P1055, titled “Definitions for gene technology and new breeding techniques,” FSANZ has modernized the GM food definitions to reflect advances in gene technologies while maintaining robust food safety protections.

1. The previous process-based definition of “food produced using gene technology” has been replaced by an outcome-based definition of “genetically modified food.”
2. The new definition focuses on the introduction of novel DNA into an organism or cells.
3. Genetic changes that occur naturally or through conventional breeding are excluded from the GM classification.
4. Foods produced using new breeding techniques, such as genome editing, will not be classified as GM food if no novel DNA is introduced.

Implications for Food Safety and Regulatory Consistency

• The updated definitions aim to remove ambiguity, improve clarity, and enhance predictability in GM food regulation.
• They ensure continued protection of public health and safety in line with Sustainable Development Goal 3 (Good Health and Well-being).
• These definitions will be applied consistently across the Code, supporting uniform GM food assessment and labeling.
• Regulatory oversight will remain proportionate to risk, aligning with SDG 12 (Responsible Consumption and Production).
• The updates align Australia and New Zealand’s regulatory approach with international standards adopted by countries such as Canada, Japan, and England, promoting SDG 17 (Partnerships for the Goals).
• Existing requirements for pre-market safety assessment and labeling of GM foods will continue to be enforced.

FSANZ CEO Dr. Sandra Cuthbert emphasized that the new definitions reflect the latest scientific understanding and provide greater clarity for industry, regulators, and consumers. She noted, “Our safety assessment confirms that many modifications achieved through new breeding techniques are equivalent to those from conventional breeding, which is widely recognized as safe.”

The FSANZ approval will now be reviewed by Australian and New Zealand food ministers, who have 60 days to consider the decision.

Opposition from the Australian Organic Sector

The updated definitions have met opposition from some food industry sectors, notably Australian Organic Ltd., a trade group representing the Australian organic industry.

Concerns Raised by Australian Organic

• Australian Organic argues that the changes would remove consumers’ right to know if their food has been genetically modified or gene edited, impacting SDG 12 (Responsible Consumption and Production) by limiting informed consumer choice.
• The group warns that the updates would allow significant volumes of genetically engineered food into the Australian market without mandatory safety testing, traceability, or labeling.
• The revised definition would also apply to foods derived from gene-edited animals, potentially making Australia the first country to permit such products without transparency or oversight.
• Josefine Pettersson, Operations and Technical Manager at Australian Organic, stated, “Traceability without transparency is a dangerous illusion,” highlighting risks to consumer trust and food system integrity.
• Australian Organic emphasizes that organic supply chains would bear the burden of testing ingredients for undeclared gene-editing technologies, while manufacturers and importers would have no obligation to declare their use.
• The group notes that major trading partners such as the EU, Japan, and South Korea continue to regulate gene-edited foods or require traceability protocols, underscoring potential risks to export markets and SDG 8 (Decent Work and Economic Growth).

Call for a Comprehensive Review

Australian Organic is urging food ministers to pause the proposal and commission a full review that includes assessment of:

• The cost implications for compliance systems and certification bodies
• The impact on consumer trust and informed choice, supporting SDG 16 (Peace, Justice, and Strong Institutions)
• The effect on Australia’s export relationships and equivalency recognition, relevant to SDG 17 (Partnerships for the Goals)

Conclusion

The FSANZ update of genetically modified food definitions represents a significant step toward modernizing food safety regulations in Australia and New Zealand, with important implications for public health, consumer rights, and international trade. Balancing innovation in gene technology with transparency and consumer trust remains a critical challenge aligned with multiple Sustainable Development Goals.

1. Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) Addressed or Connected

1. SDG 2: Zero Hunger
   • Ensuring food security and promoting sustainable agriculture through regulation of genetically modified foods.
2. SDG 3: Good Health and Well-being
   • Protecting public health and safety by updating food safety standards and definitions for genetically modified foods.
3. SDG 12: Responsible Consumption and Production
   • Promoting transparency, traceability, and informed consumer choice regarding genetically modified and gene-edited foods.
4. SDG 17: Partnerships for the Goals
   • Aligning Australia and New Zealand’s regulatory approaches with international standards and trading partners.

2. Specific Targets Under Those SDGs

1. SDG 2: Zero Hunger
   • Target 2.4: By 2030, ensure sustainable food production systems and implement resilient agricultural practices.
2. SDG 3: Good Health and Well-being
   • Target 3.9: By 2030, substantially reduce the number of deaths and illnesses from hazardous chemicals and air, water, and soil pollution and contamination.
3. SDG 12: Responsible Consumption and Production
   • Target 12.6: Encourage companies, especially large and transnational companies, to adopt sustainable practices and to integrate sustainability information into their reporting cycle.
   • Target 12.8: By 2030, ensure that people everywhere have the relevant information and awareness for sustainable development and lifestyles in harmony with nature.
4. SDG 17: Partnerships for the Goals
   • Target 17.14: Enhance policy coherence for sustainable development.
   • Target 17.16: Enhance the global partnership for sustainable development, complemented by multi-stakeholder partnerships.

3. Indicators Mentioned or Implied to Measure Progress

1. Indicator for SDG 2.4
   • Proportion of agricultural area under sustainable practices, including the use of gene technology and new breeding techniques.
2. Indicator for SDG 3.9
   • Number of food safety incidents related to genetically modified foods and gene-edited products.
   • Pre-market safety assessments conducted for GM foods.
3. Indicators for SDG 12.6 and 12.8
   • Existence and enforcement of labeling and traceability regulations for GM and gene-edited foods.
   • Consumer awareness and access to information about genetically modified and gene-edited foods.
4. Indicators for SDG 17.14 and 17.16
   • Alignment of national food safety regulations with international standards.
   • Number of international agreements or partnerships on food safety and biotechnology regulation.

4. Table of SDGs, Targets, and Indicators

Source: food-safety.com