Should genetic engineering be used as a tool for conservation?

29th September 2017

Web dna istock 576924530 1



Clare Oxborrow

Senior food and farming campaigner, Friends of the Earth

“No: GM is clunky and outdated”

The use of genetic modification (GM) may appear to be an attractive tool, but lessons from its use in farming suggest we shouldn’t hold our breath.

GM has had a fair run in agriculture. Over the past 30-plus years much has been promised, and vast amounts have been spent, yet only two simple modifications have been achieved commercially in crop plants – herbicide tolerance and insect resistance. These have caused huge problems for farmers and ecosystems – for example, from resistant weeds emerging that require the use of more chemical herbicides to control them. More useful and complex modifications like drought and salt tolerance and nitrogen fixation, though long awaited and researched, have still failed to materialise commercially.

Releasing GM plants and animals into the environment is a risk. There will always be uncertainty over the long-term impacts on wild populations and their wider ecosystems. Insect-resistant cotton seemed to provide a sustainable solution to the problem of cotton bollworm, but after only a few generations, problems emerged with secondary pests – thriving because their predators have been controlled by the insecticide produced by the GM plants.

There is a critical role for good science in conservation. But GM is a clunky and outdated technique unlikely to play a significant role. We shouldn’t get distracted by the lure of a techno-fix.

Thomas Maloney

Director of conservation science, Revive and Restore

“Yes: to complement, not replace key tenets”

Conservationists have been cognisant of managing the genetic condition of wildlife for generations. Efforts to restore bottlenecked wildlife species have required careful tracking of the pedigree of captive-bred individuals or translocation of distant individuals. These efforts are arguably a form of genetic engineering. In the US, the California Condor recovery programme is making great strides in managing the population genetics of the species as it has recovered from 23 individuals to over 400 today.

Medical and agricultural advances offer transformational tools. Intractable diseases like Chytrid fungus, threatening amphibians, and white-nose syndrome in bats may necessitate genetic engineering solutions. Bioengineering offers applications with invasive pests, disease resistance, facilitated adaptation to climate change, and synthetic alternatives to wildlife products.

In a time when the threats have never been greater and tools more powerful, the fundamental tenets of conservation still apply. Habitat, ecological processes and environmental health are critical. Biotech can complement but not replace these core necessities of a functioning biosphere. Indeed, the power of these tools compels a responsible, deliberate and open consideration of implications. But, given the scale of humanity’s impact, perhaps the question is: “Can conservation afford to not use new genetic engineering tools that could save our wildlife?”

Dr Helen Wallace

Executive director, GeneWatch UK

“No: de-extinction is hype, not reality”

The idea of ‘de-extinction’, using cloning and genetically engineered eggs, is hype, not reality. The very high failure rates in pregnancies using cloned or genetically engineered eggs in mammals, and other technical difficulties in birds, make rescuing near-extinct species using this technology unlikely. Without the right habitats and the ability to produce sufficient numbers of animals with high genetic variability – unlikely, given the limited DNA from extinct species that is available – this idea makes no sense.

Releasing large numbers of sterile organisms can crash a population, and might affect invasive species, at least temporarily. However, truly sterile organisms that do not evolve resistance are unlikely to be achievable through genetic engineering. Impacts when released into the environment may be negative as a result of the need for repeated mass releases of harmful organisms, or as a result of ecosystem responses over time. If population suppression is successful, this is likely to be temporary, and could also lead to harmful surges in competitor species.

‘Gene drive’, which in theory could spread genetically engineered traits, such as sterility or disease resistance, is highly speculative and would pose even greater risks. This means trying to engineer whole ecosystems, with consequences which are not fully understood. Far from being the answer to conservation issues, genetic engineering is a distraction that could divert scarce funding.


Subscribe to IEMA's newsletters to receive timely articles, expert opinions, event announcements, and much more, directly in your inbox.

Transform articles

How much is too much?

While there is no silver bullet for tackling climate change and social injustice, there is one controversial solution: the abolition of the super-rich. Chris Seekings explains more

4th April 2024

Read more

One of the world’s most influential management thinkers, Andrew Winston sees many reasons for hope as pessimism looms large in sustainability. Huw Morris reports

4th April 2024

Read more

Vanessa Champion reveals how biophilic design can help you meet your environmental, social and governance goals

4th April 2024

Read more

Alex Veitch from the British Chambers of Commerce and IEMA’s Ben Goodwin discuss with Chris Seekings how to unlock the potential of UK businesses

4th April 2024

Read more

Regulatory gaps between the EU and UK are beginning to appear, warns Neil Howe in this edition’s environmental legislation round-up

4th April 2024

Read more

A project promoter’s perspective on the environmental challenges facing new subsea power cables

3rd April 2024

Read more

Senior consultant, EcoAct

3rd April 2024

Read more

Five of the latest books on the environment and sustainability

3rd April 2024

Read more

Media enquires

Looking for an expert to speak at an event or comment on an item in the news?

Find an expert

IEMA Cookie Notice

Clicking the ‘Accept all’ button means you are accepting analytics and third-party cookies. Our website uses necessary cookies which are required in order to make our website work. In addition to these, we use analytics and third-party cookies to optimise site functionality and give you the best possible experience. To control which cookies are set, click ‘Settings’. To learn more about cookies, how we use them on our website and how to change your cookie settings please view our cookie policy.

Manage cookie settings

Our use of cookies

You can learn more detailed information in our cookie policy.

Some cookies are essential, but non-essential cookies help us to improve the experience on our site by providing insights into how the site is being used. To maintain privacy management, this relies on cookie identifiers. Resetting or deleting your browser cookies will reset these preferences.

Essential cookies

These are cookies that are required for the operation of our website. They include, for example, cookies that enable you to log into secure areas of our website.

Analytics cookies

These cookies allow us to recognise and count the number of visitors to our website and to see how visitors move around our website when they are using it. This helps us to improve the way our website works.

Advertising cookies

These cookies allow us to tailor advertising to you based on your interests. If you do not accept these cookies, you will still see adverts, but these will be more generic.

Save and close