Search results

AbstractGenetically engineered gene drives (geGD) are potentially powerful tools for suppressing or even eradicating populations of pest insects. Before living geGD insects can be released into the environment, they must pass an environmental risk assessment to ensure that their release will not cause unacceptable harm to non‐targeted entities of the environment. A key research question concerns the likelihood that nontarget species will acquire the functional GD elements; such acquisition could lead to reduced abundance or loss of those species and to a disruption of the ecosystem services they provide. The main route for gene flow is through hybridization between the geGD insect strain and closely related species that co‐occur in the area of release and its expected dispersal. Using the invasive spotted‐wing drosophila, Drosophila suzukii, as a case study, we provide a generally applicable strategy on how a combination of interspecific hybridization experiments, behavioral observations, and molecular genetic analyses can be used to assess the potential for hybridization.

A possible way to alleviate the public skepticism toward regulatory science is to increase transparency by making all data and value judgments used in regulatory decision making accessible for public interpretation, ideally early on in the process, and following the concepts of Open Science. This paper discusses the opportunities and challenges in strengthening Open Science initiatives in regulatory environmental risk assessment (ERA). In this discussion paper, we argue that the benefits associated with Open Science in regulatory ERA far outweigh its perceived risks. All stakeholders involved in regulatory ERA (e.g., governmental regulatory authorities, private sector, academia, and nongovernmental organizations), as well as professional organizations like the Society of Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry, can play a key role in supporting the Open Science initiative, by promoting the use of recommended reporting criteria for reliability and relevance of data and tools used in ERA, and by developing a communication strategy for both professionals and nonprofessionals to transparently explain the socioeconomic value judgments and scientific principles underlying regulatory ERA. Integr Environ Assess Manag 2021;17:1229–1242. © 2021 The Authors. Integrated Environmental Assessment and Management published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of Society of Environmental Toxicology & Chemistry (SETAC)

We discuss options to reform the EU genetically modified organisms (GMO) regulatory framework, make risk assessment and decision-making more consistent with scientific principles, and lay the groundwork for international coherence. The first in a three-part series, this article focuses on reform options related to the scope of the legislation and the GMO definition.

Here, we discuss options to reform the EU genetically modified organism (GMO) regulatory framework, to make risk assessment and decision-making more consistent with scientific principles, and to lay the groundwork for international coherence. We discussed the scope and definitions in a previous article and, thus, here we focus on the procedures for risk assessment and risk management.