In June, the European Union lifted tough restrictions on growing gene-edited crops. The changes followed growing criticism that Europe is lagging behind other regions in adopting innovative plant biotechnology.

Previously, all gene-edited plants were regulated as genetically modified organisms (GMOs). GMOs can incorporate DNA from other species, causing public concern. Gene editing, using CRISPR technology for example, involves making only small changes to an organism’s DNA.

As a plant geneticist and agronomist, I believe the EU’s change in direction could be a game-changer for the region’s agricultural sector. However, flaws in the new regulations could limit their usefulness and undermine public confidence in gene-edited crops.

Why gene editing matters for European food security

This shift comes as climate change and geopolitical instability put pressure on local food security. The EU’s restrictions on pesticides and regulations on fertilizer use mean that farmers need crop varieties with broad disease resistance and efficient nutrient use.

Gene editing can rapidly change traits such as drought and heat tolerance, helping produce crops that outperform traditional varieties. Farmers are in dire straits because of usage restrictions. A 2023 impact assessment by the European Commission estimates that annual economic losses for EU farmers could reach up to €2.7 billion (US$2.3 billion) for grains by the early 2030s. Read the European Commission information on new genomic techniques.

More permissive rules could also support research by stemming the brain drain and loss of intellectual property that have occurred over the past decade.

How the EU’s NGT-1 and NGT-2 rules work

However, the EU should address flaws in the legislation as it develops and communicates the new rules.

The latest regulations divide gene-edited crops into two groups: New Genome Technologies 1 (NGT-1) and NGT-2. Learn more about how NGT plants are regulated.

NGT-1 crops may have limited modifications but are considered equivalent to plants bred by conventional methods and are regulated accordingly. All other NGT plants fall under NGT-2 and continue to be regulated under strict GMO rules.

Why limits on gene-edited crops could hinder innovation

Strict rules govern the number of edits an NGT-1 crop can have and the number of DNA base pairs that can be changed with each edit to match what occurs naturally. However, these constraints are arbitrary and artificial. Mutations occur randomly in nature, with no limit on their type or number. Traditional breeding programmes aimed at improving specific traits often include hundreds of genetic variations.

These limitations make it difficult to combine multiple edited traits in a single crop variety or to use gene editing to improve traits controlled by many genes, such as yield or stress tolerance.

What the EU can learn from US gene-editing regulation

As implementation progresses, the EU should consider introducing greater flexibility. The United States provides one example: crops are approved based on the product rather than the breeding methods used.

US regulators focus on whether a plant’s characteristics pose a risk to public health or the ecosystem, rather than on how the plant was produced or which genetic changes it contains. A similar approach could help Europe develop gene-edited crops for climate resilience while maintaining appropriate safety standards.