Table 2


From the following article

Strangled at birth? Forest biotech and the Convention on Biological Diversity

Steven H. Strauss, Huimin Tan, Wout Boerjan & Roger Sedjo

Nature Biotechnology 27, 519 - 527 (2009)

doi:10.1038/nbt0609-519

BACK TO ARTICLE

Table 2. Views of major scientific and professional societies on evaluation of genetically engineered crops and trees

OrganizationFoundedExpenses 2006Position

Obtained from reports and web pages that suggest position on genetic engineering, not an official position statement.

aAnnual expenses at end of 2005. NA, not available.

Friends of the Earth1970$3,568,260"In the case of the Convention on Biological Diversity, it is clear that GMOs in general and GM trees in particular, constitute a violation of the convention..." "We therefore call upon all governments, especially the Parties to the Framework Convention on Climate Change and its Kyoto Protocol, to ban the release of GM trees." <http://www.wrm.org.uy/subjects/GMTrees/text.pdf>
Greenpeace1971$15,556,440"Greenpeace is opposed to the release of genetically engineered organisms into the environment at the present state of knowledge and calls for a ban on the release of transgenic trees. As an interim measure a global moratorium on commercial releases and on larger scale experimental releases is recommended." <http://www.genet-info.org/fileadmin/files/genet/GE_Trees/2006_GP_GETrees.pdf>
Int. Union Conservation Nature (IUCN)1986$902,112"Research into GM applications should continue and indeed accelerate but with 'eyes wide open', assessing each GM application on a case-by-case basis." <http://cmsdata.iucn.org/downloads/ip_gmo_09_2007_1_.pdf>
Natural Resources Defense Council1936$63,774,845"...we do not have an official position on [genetically engineered crops and trees]..." (J. Powers, NRDC New York Media Relations Director, personal communication on Nov. 19th, 2008).
Sierra Club1960$83,432,700a"Sierra Club has taken no positions regarding genetic engineering done in labs or in indoor manufacturing of pharmaceuticals." "Sierra Club opposes the out-of-doors deployment of genetic technologies [GM trees]." <http://www.sierraclub.org/biotech/trees.asp>
The Nature Conservancy (TNC)1951$671,580,417"...the Nature Conservancy does NOT have any specific policy or position on GMOs." (M. Tu, TNC, personal communication on July 24, 2008)
Union of Concerned Scientists1969$12,576,026"Risks must be assessed case by case as new applications of genetic engineering are introduced." <http://www.ucsusa.org/food_and_environment/genetic_engineering/risks-of-genetic-engineering.html>
Worldwatch Institute1974$873,521"The Worldwatch Institute has no position statement or policy with regard to genetically engineered crops and trees." (Robert Engelman, Worldwatch, personal communication, July 25, 2008). A recent paper published by a staff member suggests case-by-case consideration of merits and risks for specific products. <http://www.worldwatch.org/system/files/EP145B.pdf>
BACK TO ARTICLE