The EU has taken an important step in its approach to modern plant breeding. After many years of highly restrictive regulations on genetic modification, it is now opening the door to the cautious use of gene editing in the development of new crop varieties.
This marks a turning point in European biotechnology policy and may also have major implications for Norway.
The story truly begins in 1972, when Nobel laureate Paul Berg at Stanford University demonstrated that DNA could be transferred from one bacterium to another and that genetic traits could be transferred along with it. This laid the foundation for a new era in biotechnology. In the United States, optimism was high. During the 1970s, companies emerged that focused on the genetic modification of agricultural crops by introducing traits from bacteria, fungi, and plants. The regulatory framework was permissive, and largely remains so today.
Europe initially appeared to be moving in the same direction. In the early 1990s, EU regulations governing agricultural biotechnology were broadly comparable to those in the United States. However, attitudes changed dramatically in 1996 when the first commercial shipment of the genetically modified soybean Roundup Ready arrived in Europe. The soybean had been developed to tolerate applications of the herbicide Roundup, which contains glyphosate. Public reactions were strong. Environmental organizations protested vigorously, and consumers showed limited trust in the technology. As a result, the EU adopted a precautionary approach that effectively halted the cultivation of genetically modified (GM) crops in Europe.
Norway followed a similar path. It is easy to forget that Norwegian politicians and research institutions were originally positive towards biotechnology. During the 1980s, biotechnology was promoted as a national priority area, and substantial funding was invested in genetics and plant science research. Over time, however, skepticism increased. The Norwegian Gene Technology Act of 1993 became one of the strictest such laws in the world, partly because it required documented societal benefit before GM organisms could be approved. In practice, this also brought the use of genetic modification in Norwegian agriculture to a standstill.
While Europe and Norway tightened regulations, development continued elsewhere in the world. GM crops expanded rapidly, particularly in maize, soybean, and cotton production. Today, these varieties are cultivated across vast areas outside the EU and Norway. By 2024, the global area planted with GM crops corresponded to nearly seven times the land area of mainland Norway.
Much of the criticism of GM crops has focused on concerns about introducing genes from unrelated organisms. This is why CRISPR technology attracted such widespread attention when it emerged in 2012. With this method, researchers can make precise changes to a plant's own genes without necessarily introducing foreign DNA. This prompted a new debate: should such targeted genetic modifications be regulated in the same way as conventional GMOs?
The EU has now begun to answer that question with a "no." The new regulatory framework for plants developed using so-called New Genomic Techniques (NGTs) allows small, well-defined genetic changes to be subject to a simpler approval process than conventional GM crops. In Norway, these approaches are often referred to as precision breeding. More extensive genetic modifications will remain subject to strict regulation. The new legislation is expected to enter into force in 2028.
This is not a revolution. It is a cautious opening. Yet that is precisely why it represents a milestone.
Gene editing has the potential to make plant breeding both faster and more precise. A Norwegian example is the potato variety Nansen, which produces red tubers. Some consumers prefer yellow-fleshed potatoes. Researchers in the GENEinnovate project have demonstrated that a well-characterized gene controlling red pigmentation can be altered using CRISPR to produce yellow Nansen potatoes. The work can be completed in just over a year. Through conventional cross-breeding, the process would take considerably longer, and it would be difficult to preserve all the desirable characteristics of the original variety.
This illustrates where gene editing may have its greatest impact: not as a replacement for conventional plant breeding, but as a powerful and efficient complement. At a time of climate change, emerging plant diseases, and the need for more resilient food production systems, European agriculture needs more tools, not fewer.
The new EU regulations do not mean that opposition to gene-based technologies will disappear. Skepticism remains strong in many places. However, the decision demonstrates a clear distinction between traditional GMOs and precise gene editing. This is an important shift in regulatory thinking.
For Norway, this development is particularly significant. A majority of the Norwegian Biotechnology Advisory Board's Gene Technology Committee has already recommended that Norway adopt a similar approach. If this happens, Norwegian plant breeding could gain access to technologies that have long been excluded by political decisions.
For many years, Europe has remained on the sidelines while much of the rest of the world has adopted gene-based tools in agriculture. The door is now opening, albeit cautiously. In the long run, this may prove to be one of the most important developments in modern European plant breeding.