Despite the innovations already in place, and with a tsunami of discoveries coming every month, gene editing represents an immense public policy challenge. With new technologies come ideological opponents to innovation. Environmental groups suspicious of technology, court cases and regulations passed over the objections of the science community, particularly in Europe, are already maneuvering to stifle innovation. Our job as advocates for choice and science will continue to be making the case for the Innovation Principle—allowing scientists and scientific agencies to make determinations of efficacy and safety, and not being at the mercy of the theatre of our broken political process.
This index illustrates the existing differences in regulation for gene editing in plants, animals and humans and the frameworks for gene drives. The index was created to help journalists, regulators, and policy-makers understand how their actions can help or stifle innovation.
COLORS AND RATINGS GUIDE
|Determined: No Unique Regulations*||10|
|Proposed: No Unique Regulations**||6|
|Ongoing Research, Regulations In Development||5|
|Limited Research, No Clear Regulations||1|
*Gene editing regulated under existing legislation with no unique restrictions, except Argentina, which passed new, flexible regulations. / **Decrees under consideration, but not yet passed, to regulate gene-edited crops or animals as conventional.
Human and Agricultural Gene Editing Regulations
|Country / Region||Food / Crops||Animals||Ag Rating|