NGT, the EU agreement worries the organic sector

NGT, the ongoing European reform

The ongoing European reform aims to exclude plants obtained with NGT from the strict GMO regulation established by Directive 2001/18/EC. The core of the new regulation is the introduction of a binary classification:

• NGT-1: plants with fewer than 20 genomic modifications, considered ‘equivalent’ to conventional ones and therefore exempt from authorization, traceability, and labeling obligations in stages following seed sale;

• NGT-2: plants with more complex genetic modifications, including those with herbicide resistance traits, subject to a simplified authorization regime compared to that established for ‘first generation’ GMOs.

Transparency and freedom of choice

IFOAM (International Federation of Organic Agriculture Movements) – together with FederBio, AssoBio, Demeter, NaturaSì, and Girolomoni – highlight two possible critical issues related to the ongoing reform:

• the elimination of obligations of traceability would make it difficult for producers and distributors to guarantee the absence of ingredients ‘OGM-free’ on which organic production as well as much of Italian agri-food production is based;

• the elimination of the obligation of labeling specific on food products that contain or derive from NGT-1 plants would also deprive consumers of the possibility to make informed choices in this regard.

Precautionary principle

The established rules in the European Union require a specific risk assessment, by EFSA (European Food Safety Authority) – before the deliberate release into the environment of any GMO, as well as before the placing on the market of food and feed containing or derived from them – and a subsequent authorization by the European Commission, based on the Precautionary principle enshrined in the Treaty on the Functioning of the EU (TFEU) in Article 191.

The deregulation of plants NGT-1 would abolish this prior assessment, allowing their release into the environment and subsequent use in food and feed without prior authorization, based on a presumed ‘equivalence’ with conventional varieties. This presumption has moreover been the subject of an ongoing unresolved scientific debate, as desirable, by EFSA (Dongo, 2023). This approach could expose the environment and biodiversity to inadequately assessed risks.

Patents and risks for farmers

Most NGT plants will logically be protected by patent, with significant implications for farmers who could be exposed to payment requests for ‘royalties’ and possible legal disputes even in cases of accidental contamination of conventional and organic crops with patented NGT seeds.

The farmers, especially small producers, could therefore be accused of violating the industrial property rights of patent holders, with the burden of proof on them to demonstrate that they have not used patented genetic material. A difficult task in the absence of reliable detection methods and an effective traceability system.

The provisional agreement provides measures such as a database public patent database, but these – in addition to favoring further concentration of the seed market – appear insufficient to protect farmers. The spread of patents on single genes or genetic traits also risks limiting access to biodiversity by plant breeders, compromising traditional genetic improvement.

Coexistence between production systems

The political agreement reached between the European Parliament and the Council also weakens the rules on coexistence, namely the measures to prevent contamination between GMO/NGT, conventional and organic crops.

Indeed, Member States have the faculty, but not the obligation, to adopt ‘coexistence measures’. Although these are all the more necessary due to the absence of traceability obligations for NGT-1 plants.

This aspect could be critical for‘Italy, where the coexistence of different production systems – organic, conventional, PDO and PGI – represents a distinctive element of the national agri-food sector.

Organic farming and NGT

The regulation (EU) 2018/848 explicitly prohibits the use of GMOs in organic production. In line with this principle and consumer expectations, both the Commission and the EU Parliament have expressed their intention to keep NGTs out of the organic sector.

However, without an effective traceability and labeling system, it would be impossible to guarantee the absence of accidental contamination and protect the integrity of certified organic productions, which in Italy represent 2.565 million hectares and domestic consumption of 3.96 billion euros (SINAB data 2025).

The status of the legislative process

It is useful to note that the agreement reached between the European Parliament and the Council is currently a provisional political agreement, and must overcome the formal approval stages at both institutions. Only after publication in the Official Journal of the European Union and a subsequent transition period will the new procedures for NGT-1 and NGT-2 become operational.

The demands of the organic sector

The organizations of the European and Italian organic sector do not oppose innovation and scientific research. On the contrary, they ask that this takes place respecting fundamental principles:

• keep all NGT under GMO regulation, ensuring risk assessment, traceability, and mandatory labeling, in line with the precautionary principle;

• provide clear rules to prevent accidental contamination and guarantee farmers the freedom to choose what to cultivate;

• promote independent research on the long-term impacts of NGT on the environment, biodiversity, and the socio-economic system;

• support the agroecological alternatives already existing, such as organic farming, biobreeding and participatory genetic improvement, which promote sustainability without resorting to genome editing and without patent constraints.

Conclusions

The protection of transparency, the environment, and citizens' right to choose what to cultivate and eat should remain a priority for the European Union. The provisional agreement on NGT, although driven by the desire to promote innovation, risks compromising these principles with potentially critical repercussions for quality agri-food systems like the Italian one, based on traceability, typicality, and environmental sustainability.

The organic sector reiterates its opposition to patents on plant varieties and on the ‘living’, claiming a model of agricultural development that combines scientific innovation, environmental protection, and the rights of farmers and consumers.

Dario Dongo

Credit cover: Being Organic in the EU 

Notes

• Dongo, D. (2023, 23 December). NGTs, new GMOs. Scientists and ANSES expose the risks of deregulation. FT (Food Times). https://www.foodtimes.eu/it/sistemi-alimentari/ngts-nuovi-ogm-gli-scienziati-e-anses-espongono-i-rischi-della-deregulation/

• IFOAM (2025, 4 December). Agreement of NGT trilogue poses a big risk to European food sovereignty: Parliament must act to rectify this. https://www.organicseurope.bio/news/ngt-trilogue-agreement-poses-a-big-risk-to-european-food-sovereignty/

• NaturaSì (2026, 21 January). Why we talk about New Genomic Techniques (NGT). https://www.naturasi.it/notizie/perche-parliamo-di-nuove-tecniche-genomiche-ngt

• ISMEA. (2025).  Organic in figures 2025. Institute of Services for the Agricultural Food Market.  https://sinab.it/bionovita/bio-in-cifre-2025-il-rapporto-completo/