Review of Labelling of Genetically Modified Foods

10.4 Consumer Attitudes to the Labelling of GM Foods in Other Countries

The information presented in this section is from a variety of different surveys and only provides an indication of consumer attitudes towards labelling of GM foods. The actual results of each of the surveys, along with the methodology employed and the sample size are included in the dot points below. The majority of APEC countries are not included in this discussion as surveys that explore consumer attitudes to GM foods in these countries were not available.

In the period between 2001 and 2003, surveys suggest that there is strong support for mandatory labelling in Hong Kong (97.7%) China (95%), EU (95%) and Australia (94%) (ABE 2003; ACA 2003; Hong Kong Food and Environment Hygiene Department, 2001 and Zhong, F., et al, 2002). In the USA and Canada, surveys indicate that consumer support has reached 92% and 85% respectively for the same time period (ABC News, 2003 and Government of Canada, 2003). In a New Zealand survey only 64% of people said that information on food labels was very important or important. However this survey also found that a large group (21%) were neutral and not prepared to state whether they thought it is an important or unimportant labelling element (NZFSA, 2002).
It is interesting that in Hong Kong China, where there is currently no mandatory GM food labelling regulation in place and it is proposed that a voluntary regime be employed, an overwhelming majority of consumers surveyed (97.7%) agree that GM foods should be labelled. The same applies to the USA and Canada that already allow voluntary labelling of GM foods.
Most recent data/survey sourced covering this issue (2001-2003 period)

• 
  Australia – Total of 94% of CHOICE Online members either strongly agree or somewhat agree that there should be comprehensive labelling of foods containing ingredients derived from gene technology or genetic modification. This total is made up of 84% strongly agreeing and 10% somewhat agreeing (ACA, 2003, data collected in September 2003, selected sample – Choice Online members were invited to answer 5 questions, 645 responses were received)
  
• 
  New Zealand – A total of 64% of respondents thought that information about GM on food labels was very important or important. This total is made up of 40% saying its very important, 24% saying its important (NZFSA, 2002, data collected August 2002, questionnaire mailed out to randomly selected ‘Consumer’ magazine subscribers, 5366 responses received)
  
• 
  EU – 95% of respondents favour the labelling of GM crops and foods regardless of the stage of processing (ABE, 2002, survey conducted by Agricultural Biotechnology in Europe in July 2002, n=3,500, aged 18+ (France: n=700, Germany: n=700, Italy: n=700, Spain: n=700, UK: n=700))
  
• 
  UK – 94% of respondents said that foods with GM ingredients should be labelled as such (Consumers’ Association (UK), 2002, quantitative data collected may 2002, questions were included in the BMRB’s ACCESS Face-to-Face Omnibus survey, n=998 aged 18+)
  
• 
  USA – 92% of Americans said GE foods should have some special labels (ABC News, 2003, data collected in 2003, random sample, telephone interviews, n=1024)
  
• 
  Canada – 85% said Canada should introduce a new labelling system for GM foods (Government of Canada, 2003, telephone survey conducted by Pollara Research in March 2003, n=600)
  
• 
  China – 95% of Chinese support labelling of GM foods (Zhong, F., et al, 2002, telephone interviews conducted in July and August 2002, random sampling, n=480 valid interviews)
  
• 
  Hong Kong – 97.7% of people in Hong Kong agree that GM foods should be labelled (Hong Kong Food and Environmental Hygiene Department, 2001, public survey conducted by Mercado Solutions (Asia) limited in November and December 2000, telephone interviews n=2017 aged 15+)
  

11.0 The Development of a Codex Standard for the Labelling of GM Foods.

11.1 The Codex Alimentarius Commission

The Codex Alimentarius Commission (Codex) was created in 1962 to implement the joint United Nations Food and Agricultural Organization (FAO) / World Health Organization (WHO) Food Standards Program. Membership in Codex is open to all member nations of the United Nations and currently 165 countries participate. Codex is the body responsible for compiling the standards, codes of practice, guidelines and recommendations that constitute the Codex Alimentarius (the international food code) setting the basis for internationally harmonised food standards for global implementation. During the past three decades or more, all important aspects of food pertaining to the protection of consumer health and fair practices have come under the Commission’s scrutiny.

Once a Codex standard has been adopted, member countries are encouraged to incorporate the standard into any relevant domestic regulations and legislation. However, under the World Trade Organization Sanitary and Phytosanitary Agreement (WTO SPS), member countries retain the right to impose more stringent food safety regulations considered necessary to ensure domestic consumer protection, provided the different standards are scientifically justifiable and otherwise consistent with the WTO SPS rules.

11.2 Development of an Internationally Accepted Labelling Standard for GM Foods

The Codex Committee on Food Labelling, hosted and chaired by Canada, examines international food-labelling issues; drafts labelling provisions that are applicable to all foods; and endorses labelling provisions prepared by Codex Committees. Over the past 10 years, the Codex Committee on Food Labelling has been considering the issue of GM food labelling in an effort to develop a standard that has input from all member countries thus promoting international harmonisation. This work demonstrates the challenging process of developing a food standard with international consensus, particularly where member countries have already developed markedly different labelling policies. Furthermore, these differing labelling policies are subject to change at the national level, as has recently been demonstrated in the EU, resulting in a shift from a ‘composition of final food’ labelling regime to a ‘method of production’ labelling regime.

Whilst Codex has adopted a labelling standard for GM foods where an allergen has been introduced to a new food, and has adopted definitions in both the organic labelling guideline and in the draft Guideline for the Conduct of Food Safety Assessment of Foods Derived from Recombinant-DNA Plants, progressing general labelling requirements has stalled.
Key elements under consideration by Codex Committee on Food Labelling are listed below and have been reflected over the years in a Draft Guideline Document (originally based on the recommendations by the Codex Executive Committee) and the Draft Recommendation document:

1. 
   A definition of food obtained from modern biotechnology and the preferred term to be used on labelling, for example, genetically modified/engineered versus modern biotechnology.
   

2. 
   Options for possible labelling regimes. The options put forward in recent times essentially reflect the different policy approaches in the USA and EU (pre-dating the new EU regulations that were adopted in July 2003).
   

• 
  Option 1 - mandatory labelling required where a GM food is no longer equivalent in terms of composition, nutritional value or intended use. Allergens and other components having health implications must be declared.
  

• 
  Option 2 - mandatory labelling required where:
  

• 
  a GM food contains protein and/or DNA resulting from gene technology; or
  
• 
  the GM Food is no longer equivalent to its conventional counterpart; in this case labelling requirements specified in Option 1 apply but also included is the presence of substances raising ethical, cultural or religious objections.
  

• 
  The following are also being considered in terms of a labelling regime:
  

• 
  threshold level in food for the presence of GM food below which labelling is not required (based on standardised testing),
  
• 
  threshold level for adventitious /accidental inclusion of GM foods.
  

The full summary provided by the Chairperson of Codex Committee on Food Labelling prior to the most Committee’s recent meeting (31^st session held in April 2003) outlining the 10-year effort to develop a standard for the labelling of GM foods is at Appendix G. The outcomes of the most recent session of the Committee are discussed below.