To the editor:

Recent commentaries on the Biosafety Protocol negotiations ( Nature Biotechnology, 17, 512, 1999) analyzed various reasons for suspension of the final meeting held in Cartagena, Colombia, in February of this year. From a scientific point of view, we would like to emphasize that the draft protocol1 contains innovative elements with respect to the safe handling, transfer and use of living modified organisms (LMOs).

In an attempt to implement the precautionary approach, lack of scientific knowledge or scientific consensus should not necessarily be interpreted as indicating a particular level of risk, an absence of risk, or an acceptable risk. In addition, where there is uncertainty regarding the level of risk, the annex on risk assessment calls for appropriate risk management strategies and complementary monitoring.

The concept of monitoring is to verify assumptions made in a risk assessment and to evaluate whether risk management measures are appropriate and effective2. Crop- and trait-specific monitoring programs for transgenic plants already exist in the United States and Canada and are currently being elaborated in the European Union.

Thus, monitoring potential adverse effects on biological diversity in the receiving environment can contribute significantly to gaining experience with the application of LMOs. When introducing transgenic plants on a global scale, therefore—with a Biosafety Protocol in place—both environmental risks and collateral economic losses could be controlled.