This week, members of the International Union for Conservation of Nature, one of the world's largest conservation groups, voted against a moratorium on the release of genetically engineered species into the wild to aid conservation efforts and to benefit the use of synthetic biology, a technology used to alter or “edit” genetic material in living cells.
The two proposals have drawn strong criticism from indigenous groups and international organizations involved in agriculture, beekeeping, conservation and biodiversity. who lobbied The International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) has imposed a moratorium. A proposal that would greenlight the use of synthetic biology for research was approved by vote.
We are talking about the effectiveness and ethical guarantees associated with genetically modified species. Since the 1990s, genetically modified foods have become available to consumers in grocery stores. However, as gene editing technologies have improved, scientists have been working on efforts related to climate change, such as mosquito-borne disease vectors, which have increased due to higher temperatures caused by climate change. For example, in AugustThe nonprofit released 16,000 genetically modified mosquitoes to kill Anopheles gambiae, the mosquito species responsible for transmitting malaria. A week later, the project was closed by the authorities.
“At this point, the science is new and we don't actually have data or evidence to suggest that this might be safe,” said Dana Pearls, senior manager of food and technology at Friends of the Earth, a network of environmental groups. “Instead, we have evidence that it is very risky. It is irreversible.”
Indigenous organizations, including Coordinator of Indigenous Organizations of the Amazon Basin And Wise ancestorsin the meantime there is argued that it is necessary to establish consultation protocols and policies that “include consideration of ethical issues such as free, prior and informed consent and data sovereignty before research applications are considered.” Free, prior and informed consent – gold standard for indigenous rights enshrined in international law must be met before companies, researchers or governments use synthetic biology in indigenous territories, they say.
“Unintended consequences can permanently impact ecosystems, including people and animals,” Perls said. ” So [we must not experiment with nature] until safeguards and robust risk assessments are in place, free and prior informed consent gives Indigenous Peoples and local communities the right to decide for themselves whether they want to participate in that risk.”
However, Susan Lieberman, a member of IUCN, called The vote was a victory in addressing biodiversity loss and conservation caused by climate change.
“These resolutions, adopted by IUCN Abu Dhabi, will guide policy towards science-based choices that protect both nature and human well-being, and include the rights and leadership of indigenous peoples, who are important partners in any long-term conservation programme,” she said.
Correction: This story has been updated to reflect Dana Pearls' correct last name and to correct a minor grammatical transcription error in the quote.
