OpenLobby.EU
Explore

EcoNexus

The objects for which the company is established are: a) To promote and carry out public education and research into: (i) the social, political, economic, ecological, environmental and health impacts of science and technology, especially new developments such as genetic engineering, synthetic biology, the new genetic engineering techniques including genome editing and gene drives, nanotechnology, bioenergy/biofuels/biomass and geo-engineering, with particular focus on the risks involved in such new techniques and technologies and the need for regulation (ii) the role of the for-profit corporation, especially in agribusiness and GE biotechnology (iii) the vital importance of conserving biodiversity and using it sustainably and equitably and (iv) the social, environmental, psychological and spiritual impacts of climate change, the destruction of biodiversity and loss of civil rights and liberties. b) To publish reports, conduct meetings and seminars and undertake education and p (...)

Lobbying Activity

Response to Ensuring that hazardous chemicals banned in the European Union are not produced for export

30 Jul 2023

I have observed and commented on the introduction of mass monocultures of genetically modified crops in Argentina from 1997 onwards (see: Argentina: A Case Study on the Impact of Genetically Engineered Soya: https://www.econexus.info/publication/argentina-case-study-impact-genetically-engineered-soya ) and noted the cumulative negative impact of herbicides and other agrotoxics sprayed from the air on biodiversity and human health. Furthermore, thousands of small farmers were forcibly expelled from their farms, sometimes with considerable violence, to make way for this development. It is important to remember that agricultural monocultures are extremely vulnerable to disease and invasive pests. Thus herbicide tolerance expanded rapidly in targeted weeds, necessitating the development of crops tolerant of these herbicides as well as, or instead of, glyphosate, whose use is still permitted in the EU. These include glufosinate ammonium, which is now banned in the EU and which the EU is still exporting. https://apps.fas.usda.gov/newgainapi/api/Report/DownloadReportByFileName?fileName=Agricultural%20Biotechnology%20Annual_Buenos%20Aires_Argentina_10-20-2020 This has led to toxic treadmills the development of crops with resistance to more than one herbicide to address these diseases and pests, leading to increased pest and weed resistance and increasingly heavy application of multiple herbicides and pesticides in response across Argentina and also in Brazil and Paraguay. In turn, this response has continued to promote resistance to multiple herbicides amongst persistent weeds and pests. Other substances applied in these massive monocultures include chlorpyrifos, cypermethrin and endosulfan, banned in the EU, but which the EU is still exporting. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/B9780444593894000021 https://ri.conicet.gov.ar/bitstream/handle/11336/24885/CONICET_Digital_Nro.db45f812-2be9-4960-b24f-f194a2faaf39_A.pdf?sequence=2&isAllowed=y In Argentina, the application of multiple chemicals from the air to crops engineered to be tolerant of these chemicals has had - and continues to have - profound impacts on the health of communities ranging from villages to small towns. Impacts range from miscarriages and birth defects to serious skin problems. https://www.econexus.info/files/corruption-of-agricultural-science-orfc.pdf Another major problem the EU must consider is the fact that in many countries, pesticides are applied without the precautions prescribed, for example, proper protective equipment for workers, often women, to protect them from the agrotoxics they are forced to apply. Other issues include: people having no access to health checks or treatment and no choice about their working conditions. This is a vital point: the EU may have regulations for the use of agrotoxics, but the countries to which they export them often do not, or else these are not enforced. This means that it is simply not morally acceptable to export agrotoxics to such countries, even if their use is allowed in the EU. Where it is no longer allowed, but the EU continues to export, this is even worse. The expansion of agricultural monocultures of GM crops across South America has led to the destruction of forests, with serious negative impacts on soil quality and water supplies. Such forest clearance also leads to accelerated climate change. It has also had serious negative impacts on Indigenous Peoples, whose lands have been appropriated by producers of these crops, for example in Paraguay: https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2021/11/30/how-paraguay-indigenous-communities-are-fighting-big-soy Much of the GM soya and corn exported from Argentina, Paraguay, Brazil etc is used as feed, for example pigs in intensive production in Germany. This demonstrates the serious impacts of the consumption of meat produced in such feedlots in the global north on biodiversity, climate and people in the global south.
Read full response

Meeting with Léon Delvaux (Cabinet of President Jean-Claude Juncker) and Greenpeace European Unit

5 Feb 2016 · New Plant Breeding

Meeting with Vytenis Andriukaitis (Commissioner) and

28 Sept 2015 · New breeding techniques, GMO