Page 108 - Breeding and regulatory opportunities, Renaud

Chapter 3

The prospects for harmonization of organic policies and regulatory regimes

between the EU and the US on the other hand are inluenced by the fact that the

EU acknowledges UPOV ’91 (the International Convention for the Protection of

New Plant Varieties, 1991) that governs and protects breeders’ rights worldwide.

The EU’s interpretation of the Convention’s requirements has led to a common

catalogue containing each marketed variety in the EU that has met the criteria

of Distinctness, Uniformity and Stability (DUS) and that has been tested to assess

the variety’s Value for Cultivation and Use (VCU). The compulsory registration

and release system in the EU set up to provide protection to farmers against

the potential purchase of poor quality seed of questionable varieties, makes

illegal the marketing of seeds from unregistered varieties, including seeds

grown and traded amongst farmers. In contrast the US’ strict seed labelling

and testing laws prescribe that seed packaging labels include information on

the crop, variety name, percentage germination and purity. It does not enforce

such strict varietal testing and registration procedures as in the EU case (Chable

et al., 2012). In consequence of these diferences, EU seed companies tend

to handle fewer varieties than their US counterparts, who are able to release

and market varieties more easily. The more limited assortment of registered

varieties available to growers in the EU, combined with more rigorous organic

seed standards, has forced organic growers to learn how to cope with a smaller,

more regulated assortment than continued use of conventional untreated seed

would allow (Bocci, 2009). By contrast, the organic sector in the US continues to

operate under light regulatory guidance that has allowed more frequent and

continued recourse to conventional untreated seed, in a context in which a large

portfolio of varieties is available and new varieties are brought easily to market.

These conditions in themselves impose signiicant barriers to development of a

single US-wide organic database. In the absence of stronger state involvement

in the development and enforcement of the regulatory framework, and a clearer

allocation of authority and responsibility in partnership with the various self-

organizing networks that have emerged, it seems likely that the US will not be

able to deploy appropriate procedural and substantial regulatory instruments

to compete on level terms with the EU organic sector for some time.

The regulatory diferences that now exist between the EU and the US raises the

question of how trade relations between the two continents might develop.

For instance, what are the implications for trade in organic products if the EU

90