Public awareness and understanding of the technology behind the creation of Genetically Modified Organisms
(GMOs) varies greatly from country to country, and indeed within the different sectors of any one country. Perhaps,
it is “the fear of the unknown” at work, or it is just a pure rejection of the idea that “Man is playing God”. For whatever
reason, and for whatever vested interest, there is often widespread clamor for stringent studies to be carried out
when conducting a risk assessment of GMOs.
For example, in Indonesia, regulation on the release of GMOs requires studies on any impact on non-target
organisms (NTOs) as well as on soil microorganisms (Machmud Thohari 2014). Similarly, in Vietnam, it is mandatory
to determine if there is any impact to the soil environment or ecosystem (Truong 2014), while in Cambodia, there is
worry over high levels of damage to NTOs and the environment from GMOs, because of the lack of capacity to cope
with such damage if it occurs (Pisey 2014).
All too often, opponents of modern biotechnology (a term used to define technologies resulting in GMOs), and,
indeed, the regulators themselves forget that there is already a procedure in place to provide a check and balance;
the risk assessment (RA) protocol. Most times, RA is far more stringent when conducted on GMOs compared with
when exotic species which are non-GMOs are involved (Tan 2013). It is also overlooked that modern biotechnology
can after all be considered a sophisticated new tool in plant breeding, an activity which has been practiced both by
farmers and scientists for millennia, and a technology accepted by all and sundry.
While GMOs are currently used in biological and medical research, for the production of pharmaceutical drugs,
in experimental medicine (e.g. gene therapy) and in agriculture, this paper is confined to discussions on GMOs in
agriculture.