Groups slam lack of scientific rigour and meaningful public participation

The Chilean Pesticide Action Network (RAP-Chile), together with various environmental, farmers’, beekeepers’ and consumer organisations, has strongly criticised the process initiated by the Agricultural and Livestock Service (SAG) regarding the regulation of crops obtained using technologies such as CRISPR/Cas9, known internationally as new genomic techniques (NGT). In the organisations’ view, the process reveals serious shortcomings in terms of the lack of meaningful public participation and the absence of scientific rigour in the process used to assess the genetic material of genetically edited crops.

RAP-Chile also criticised the SAG for failing to take into account the critical issues and risks associated with NGTs, particularly regarding their safety and level of accuracy.

One of the most controversial topics is the authorisation of GM gene-edited wheat, engineered for higher dietary fibre content. SAG deregulated the wheat in July 2025, under criteria that the organisations describe as arbitrary. These criteria – based on a supposed ‘equivalence’ with conventional crops – have been defined by the very companies developing these technologies. However, the scientific community maintains that there is no solid basis for considering plants with profound modifications to their genome to be equivalent to conventional varieties.

María Elena Rozas, national coordinator of RAP-Chile, warned that in practice, the gene-edited wheat was assessed using non-exhaustive, rapid and low-cost analyses, such as the short-read genome sequencing method, to determine whether or not it constitutes a transgenic organism, which allowed it to be classified as conventional and exempted it from more in-depth risk assessments prior to its release into the environment and commercialisation. She said: “This could put at risk biodiversity and agricultural systems, particularly organic and agroecological ones.”

She also warned that the regulation could allow companies to evade requirements such as traceability, coexistence and liability for damages.

Alicia Muñoz of ANAMURI, the National Rural and Indigenous Women's Association, emphasised the impact on rural and indigenous women, the guardians of seeds: “The conservation of native seeds and food sovereignty are at risk.” She warned that decisions left in the hands of corporations threaten the autonomy of territories and ancestral knowledge.

Camilo Guzmán of the Asociación de Agricultores Unidos (United Farmers' Association) denounced the lack of protection for farmers: "There are no clear rules regarding genetic contamination, nor any compensation mechanisms. Without labelling or traceability, no one can know what is in the bread they eat.”

Hernán Calderón of the Chilean consumers' organisation CONADECUS highlighted the violation of consumer rights: “Failing to disclose the origin of food limits the right to accurate information.”

The organisations also questioned the fact that the public consultation did not incorporate key observations and served merely to validate decisions that had already been taken.

Read the full article in Spanish

Source: RAP-Chile

Images: Shutterstock (licensed purchase)