The Swedish environmental movement's critical attitude towards genetically modified crops are many times worth. This is according to "society for the conservation of Nature" (Naturskyddsföreningen).
"New GM varieties is no silver bullet"
DN Debate October 1, 2011
- There are a number of studies from researchers who believe that biodiversity decreases for growing genetically modified plants as compared to more conventional plants. It does not say that all GM crops are bad, but we have seen evidence in research that there may be problems with diversity in agricultural landscapes and that requires tough regulations, says Mikael Karlsson, President of the Society for Nature Conservation.
The Nature Conservation Society has most recently tried to establish a regulatory framework in which those who put out the GM plants and trees also are held responsible for any future damage to the environment they may have caused. But those this concern have opposed such liability, says Mikael Karlsson.
- They would not bear the risk through insurance or otherwise, even though we have such technology in other areas where there's a lack of knowledge or environmental risks, says Mikael Karlsson.
A counter-arguments from environmental groups that the researchers now criticizes about the crops that provide a more sustainable agriculture is not yet launched.
Crops in the long run would help eradicate world hunger. But according to the researchers, it is precisely the EU's strict rules and other conflicts that prevent such a success.
But Mikael Karlsson maintains that the new crops are not the solution to world hunger.
- New GM varieties are no "silver bullet" or quick fix, but this will require a wide range of other measures that you have to prioritize and invest more resources, he says.
.
