b'researchers found the UK would have to dramatically increaseease, drought and pests; more nitrogen efficient (they would its food imports. According to the BBC, due to significantlyneed less chemical fertilizer); safer (peanuts without harmful lower productivity in other countries, this would require fiveallergens; wheat without gluten deadly to people with celiac dis-times the amount of land that is currently used for food inease); healthier (crops with omega 3s). The advantages are end-England and Wales, consuming 6 million more hectares of land. lessif we dont regulate this promising technology to death.Where would it find new farmland? As there is almost noIt may not be fashionable to say this, particularly in Europe, arable hectares left in the world, the UK flip to organic alonebut we will continue to need chemical pesticides, complemented would likely lead to clear-cutting of forests to create more farm- by a new suite of engineered products with small toxic foot-land. In essence, F2F is a bad deal for the developing world, as itprints. While the toxicity and the volume of use of modern pes-would export its environmental externalities to poorer regions,ticides have dropped precipitously since the 1980s, and is being all because of Europes organic fixation. reduced every year, organic pesticide toxicity has dropped 0%. Should we be judicious going forward? Yes. But lets listen BEYOND F2F: PUTTING AGRICULTURALto the science here, not to chemophobic, anti-technology scare-SUSTAINABILITY AHEAD OF IDEOLOGY mongering, when it comes to setting agricultural policy.Synthetic chemicals are only part of the sustainability equation.Here is the challenge to F2F supporters: if you want the Eco-responsibility means different things to different farmingrest of the world to take seriously the desire to address climate experts. Greenhouse gas emissions? Land usage? Productivitychange by exporting a European farming model, it would serve per acre? Labour intensive vs mechanized agriculture? F2Fwell to reassess the impact of organic farmings carbon-increas-doesnt address the real-world complexity of sustainable farm- ing practices. Boutique policies like reverting world agriculture ing; its short on nuance and a science-based understanding ofto more natural lower-yield, land intensive and disease-vulner-environmental and economic tradeoffs. able farming methods are indulgences of an affluent society. We could address many challenges if we stopped a priori excluding farming methods based on superficial notions of sus- Editors Note: Jon Entine is executive director of Genetic tainability and instead looked to outputs and tradeoffs. Do weLiteracy Project. He writes ongenetics, corporate social want to feel virtuous or solve real-life problems? responsibility and environmental sustainability and was Modern technology offers solutions, most importantly,U.S. editor for 15 years of UK-based Ethical Corporation. CRISPR. Gene editing can make plants more resistant to dis- Twitter @JonEntineEUROPEAN-SEED.COMIEUROPEAN SEED I 17'