Food Safety

EU: NGTs – new GMOs at the crossroads of agriculture’s future

October 22, 2025

390

A profound transformation is brewing in the heart of the European Union, set to redefine the continent’s food and farming landscape (Dongo, 2025). The EU is in the final stages of crafting a new legal framework for New Genomic Techniques (NGTs), ‘precision breeding’ technologies like CRISPR-Cas9, or new GMOs (Genetically Modified Organisms).

While pitched as a tool for innovation, the process has ignited a fierce political and ethical debate, pitting corporate interests against the foundational principles of precaution in environmental and health protection, consumer choice, food sovereignty, and organic agriculture.

This analysis examines the key points of the ongoing negotiations — taking place in trilogue between the representatives of the European Commission, Parliament and Council (of the Member States) — and the positions of civil society, which highlight unprecedented risks.

Table of Contents

NGTs as ‘new GMOs’? The scientific reality, and the legal debate

From a technical standpoint, organisms developed by New Genomic Techniques (NGTs) are unequivocally Genetically Modified Organisms (GMOs). The distinction is not in the fundamental nature of the modification, but in the methodology: NGTs use novel, supposedly precise technologies like CRISPR-Cas9, as opposed to ‘traditional’ transgenic techniques.

This scientific reality underpins the current legal debate. In its landmark ruling on Case C-528/16, the European Court of Justice confirmed that organisms obtained through mutagenesis – including NGTs – fall within the definition of GMOs under Directive 2001/18/EC, exempting only those techniques with a long-established record of safety (European Court of Justice, 2018).

The current legislative proposal therefore aims to establish a new legal category for so-called ‘new GMOs’, asserting that their precision and targeted modifications justify a more flexible regulatory pathway. However, civil society organisations argue that this approach represents a corporation driven – yet scientifically unfounded – exemption from existing GMO legislation.

The Commission’s two-tier proposal: a flawed foundation?

In July 2023, the European Commission proposed a new regulation establishing a two-category system for NGT plants (European Commission, 2023). However, this categorization has been criticised by ANSES (2023) as being without any scientific foundation.

Category 1 NGTs: plants deemed equivalent to conventional ones would be exempt from GMO oversight – no risk assessment, no GMO labelling, and no detection methods. Crucially, Member States would lose their sovereignty to ban their cultivation on their own territory.

Category 2 NGTs: these would be subject to a simplified application of the existing GMO framework, including streamlined requirements for risk assessment.

Key battle lines in the trilogue

The EU’s Parliament and Council have staked out positions that clash with the Commission’s vision on several critical fronts.

1. Traceability and the right to know

The most significant consumer issue is transparency. For Category 1 NGTs, the Commission and Council propose only a seed label, rendering the genetic status invisible to the final consumer. The European Parliament demands full traceability for all products containing these plants, a vital safeguard for informed choice;

2. The threat of contamination and the organic ban

While all institutions concur on prohibiting the use of NGTs in organic production, the greater concern lies in the risk of contamination from neighbouring crops. Without robust coexistence measures for Category 1 NGTs, genetic drift could undermine the integrity of organic farming, erode biodiversity, and endanger the supply of traditional agricultural varieties. In this context, the Parliament’s proposal for a clause protecting organic farmers from penalties in cases of accidental contamination – an issue that already exists under current GMO legislation – represents a modest remedy for the symptoms rather than a solution to the underlying problem;

3. Patents and farmer sovereignty

This is a central point of contention. The Commission proposes a mere study, while the Council suggests an expert group. In a powerful move, the European Parliament demands a full ban on patents for all NGT plants. This responds directly to concerns that patents would consolidate power among a few large corporations – the ‘Big 4’ of the seed and pesticides industry – threatening farmers’ rights to save and exchange seeds and undermining food sovereignty.

4. The precautionary principle: unaddressed risks

The ongoing political debate leaves major concerns unresolved, as they risk being sidelined in the current drive towards deregulation. These include:

environmental risks, namely the potential impact of the deliberate release of unpredictable numbers and varieties of GMOs on biodiversity and ecosystems;

health risks, particularly those arising from unpredictable genomic rearrangements and potential impacts on the human gut microbiome;

the precautionary principle, since the proposal in effect sets it aside, undermining one of the cornerstones of EU law and favouring commercial interests over a rigorous and independent risk assessment.

Interim conclusions

The final trilogue negotiations are underway, with a potential agreement expected by the end of 2025. The outcome on patents, traceability, and coexistence will determine whether the EU embraces a model of opaque, corporate-controlled agriculture or one that safeguards transparency, farmer sovereignty, and the integrity of the organic sector.

This decision also carries major implications for consumer rights, as 59% of European citizens surveyed by EFSA in the latest Eurobarometer report (2025) declared being worried about GMOs, underscoring the public’s demand for the right to know and to choose what they eat. The future of European food is, quite literally, at a crossroads.

Dario Dongo

References

ANSES. (2023). Avis de l’Anses relatif à l’analyse scientifique de l’annexe I de la proposition de règlement de la Commission européenne du 5 juillet 2023 relative aux nouvelles génomiques (NTG) – Examen des critères d’équivalence proposés pour définir les plantes NTG de catégorie 1. Agence nationale de sécurité sanitaire de l’alimentation, de l’environnement et du travail (Anses). https://www.anses.fr

Dongo, D. (2025, 15 March). NGTs: a dark future for EU agriculture? FT (Food Times).

European Commission. (2023). Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on plants obtained by certain new genomic techniques and their food and feed. COM(2023) 411 final

European Court of Justice. (2018). Judgment of the Court (Grand Chamber) of 25 July 2018, Confédération paysanne and Others v Premier ministre and Ministre de l’Agriculture, de l’Agroalimentaire et de la Forêt, Case C-528/16. ECLI:EU:C:2018:583