Europe to Require Labels on Modified Foods

LIZETTE ALVAREZ / NY Times 2jul03

LONDON—The European Parliament approved legislation today to require strict labels for food and feed made with genetically altered ingredients, a move that was hailed by environmentalists but pilloried by American farmers.

Designed to better inform wary European consumers, the legislation would require that supermarkets label all food containing more than 0.9 percent of a genetically modified organism. So, for example, a cookie made with genetically modified corn oil would carry a label that states, "This product contains genetically modified organism."

The legislation also ensures that genetically modified (or G.M., as they are called here) foodstuffs, like grains, are traced from the moment of their inception to their arrival in the European Union through the processing stage and into the supermarket.

"This should give consumers greater confidence," said David Byrne, the European commissioner for health and consumer protection.

The new laws are expected to receive final approval by the European Union's 15 member states this fall. They would not take effect until early next year.

Genetically modified foods, which are common in the United States, are passionately opposed by many Europeans, who call them "Frankenfoods" and fear they may pose long-term health and environmental risks. These crops have been biologically altered in ways that make them more resistant to insects and enable them to grow faster.

European countries permitted the sale of some mutated crops, like soya, in the 1990's, and those are still found in European food. But, five years ago, fueled by concerns from environmental groups, seven European countries, including France and Italy, instituted an unofficial ban on the sale of any new genetically altered crops.

The Bush administration, which views the moratorium as an illegal trade tactic, filed the equivalent of a lawsuit with the World Trade Organization in May.

President Bush increased tension over the issue by blaming Europe's food policy for worsening Africa's hunger crisis. Africa, fearing repercussions from Europe, is reluctant to plant genetically modified crops that could ease famine, the Bush administration maintains.

Today's vote on the legislation was framed by commissioners and politicians as one crucial step in lifting the self-imposed moratorium.

But in practical terms, American farmers and European environmentalists both agree the new laws will not change much. In fact, American farmers say they are likely to worsen the situation.

"It's not going to lead to an increase in more agricultural trade between the U.S. and Europe," said Hayden Milberg, a trade specialist for the National Corn Growers Association, who estimated American corn farmers lose $300 million a year because of the moratorium. "It will actually hurt trade."

The labeling restrictions, he said, will likely make it prohibitively expensive to send genetically modified corn to Europe.

Genetically modified corn will have to be separated out from regular corn beginning in the grain elevators, he said. Then it will have to be carefully documented and packed separately. "There has to be a guarantee on a piece of paper," he said. "You have to show which farm it came from."

Once the food actually reaches the supermarket, it will carry some sort of tag that will label it as genetically modified, a surefire turnoff to many European consumers. Many European supermarkets no longer sell foods that have been genetically modified.

Genetically modified food has been found to be safe by a number of scientists.

But environmentalists argue that there is no evidence proving their long-term safety. And they object to genetically modified crops on the grounds that their mutated pollen easily spreads to other crops.

Today's legislation allows the 15 European Union nations to set their own rules to prevent genetically altered seeds from blowing on to the fields of conventional or organic producers.

"For G.M. enthusiasts who wanted to force this technology down European throats, the new laws are a major setback," said Ben Ayliffe, a spokesman for Greenpeace. "They opposed real choice because they know how unpopular their products are."