WORKING
DOCUMENT
Directorate-General
for Agriculture
FOOTNOTES
| 1 | ISAAA =International Service for the Acquisition of Agri-Biotech Applications is a not-for-profit international organisation co-sponsored by public and private institutions that facilitate the transfer of agri-biotech applications from industrial to developing countries for their benefit. ISAAA produces each year a global review of commercialised transgenic crops, which contains reliable data on GM area. Back |
| 2 | We do not consider here GM "products" for medical purpose. Back |
| 3 | Since end of the eighties, China has a considerable area of GM tobacco of about 1 Mio ha. This technology is "home made" and is not linked with Western biotech companies. Back |
| 4 | The gene introduced is either glyphosphate or glufosinate herbicide-tolerant. Back |
| 5 | In late 1999, the USDA revised upwards the total soybeans area for 1999. However, no indication was given as to changes for areas under GM varieties. In addition, the USDA initial estimation for the share of GM soybeans (57%) covered major producing States and included non-GM herbicide tolerant varieties. The forecasted share for 2000 (52%) only covers GM HT varieties. For these reasons, own estimates have been adopted for 1999 and 2000. Back |
| 6 | Oral Question H-0345/00 and written question P-1169/00. Back |
| 7 | The North-American rapeseed varieties are called canola. Back |
| 8 | Directive 98/44/CE OJ L 213 of 30.7.1998. Back |
| 9 | Agrigenomics specifically refers to the research of crop genomes and encompasses such areas as gene sequencing, gene mapping, molecular probes and bio-informatics amongst other things. Back |
| 11 | Canola = a type of rapeseed which has been developed in Canada. It is a registered trademark, corresponding to specified characteristics (low erucic acid and glucosinolate), equivalent to double 0 in Europe. Back |
| 12 | This assumption needs to be reconsidered : see chapters 4 and 5. Back |
| 13 | Glyphosate-resistant soybeans seem to be more vulnerable to high temperature than conventional or other GM soy varieties. BT-Cotton also seems to be sensitive on high temperature. Back |
| 14 | "Cross sectional survey", based on interviews and field observations, which should provide "statistically reliable estimates at the state level". It is not a side by side comparison of GM and non-GM crops. It covered corn/maize and soybeans (see also section on soybeans). Back |
| 15 | Counter-mobilisation emerged in Australia, probably explaining why Australia has moved a bit slower on labelling than New-Zealand despite the fact that both are members of the ANZFA. Back |
| 16 | March 1997: a survey conducted by the University of Lancaster for Unilever finds "significant unease about the technology as a whole. and much such unease is latent rather than explicit." August 1997: a survey conducted by Market Measures Ltd. for Sainsbury's reveals that UK consumers do not favor GM foods because they are "unnatural"; "Over half of those aware of genetically engineered food said they would 'probably not' or 'definitely not' buy such food." (AgBiotechNet 1997). March 1998: a Gallup poll commissioned by Iceland shows that 63% of respondents who are aware of GM food have reservations. Yet, a MORI poll indicated a lower degree of distrust of GE food in Britain: 53% would not eat GE food, against 63% of Danes, 65% of Italians and Dutch, 77% of French and 78% of Swedes (www.centerfoodsafety.org/facts&issues/polls.htm). Back |
| 17 | In contrast with the results of the Time magazine poll, IFIC President Sylvia Rowe declared in October that "The vast majority of American consumers still place a great deal of confidence in the benefits of, and current regulatory climate for, agricultural biotechnology" (IFIC 1999). In the October 1999, 51% of the respondents declared they would be likely to buy a "variety of produce. [which] ha[s] been modified by biotechnology." Yet, the question was framed as follows: "All things being equal, how likely would you be to buy a variety of produce, like tomates or potatoes if it had been modified by biotechnology to taste better or fresher?" (IFIC 1999) (emphasis added). Back |
| 18 | The report describes the retailers' "resentment of Monsanto for badly mismanaging the introduction of biotechnology in Europe and for allowing the issue to be decided in the supermarkets" (Friends of the Earth 1998). Back |
| 19 | See section 5.2.2 on Eu legislation. Back |
| 20 | The typology adopted in table 4.3 does not reflect current legislative work (see juridical differences between "GM-free" and "non-GM"). Notably, it is difficult to know whether the "GM-free" products advertized by the operators contain no GMOs, or a feeble amount of GMOs. Back |
| 21 | Commodities have been defined as substances sold in very large quantities, such as raw materials or foodstuffs such as corn, rice, butter (Dictionary of agriculture 1990). Back |
| 22 | COM(99)719 of 12/012000. Back |
| 23 | Regulation (EC) No 258/97. Back |
| 24 | Commission Directive 98/95/EC. Back |
| 25 | Regulation (EC) No 1139/98. Back |
| 26 | Regulation (EC) No 49/2000. Back |
| 27 | Regulation (EC) No 50/2000. Back |
| 28 | Common Position (EC) No 12/2000 adopted on 09/12/2000. Back |
| 29 | Marketable feedstuffs do not include green forages. Back |
[ Agriculture
] - [ Publications
]
