Associations / NGO

Patents involving the use of nanos* in agriculture have multiplied over the last 20 years. However, there has been no improvement in the availability of information in this field. A recent report, commissioned by AVICENN and published by the European Chemicals Agency (ECHA), re-emphasizes the need to change European regulations in order to better identify, assess and manage nanos in the fields and the food. AVICENN is calling for greater transparency on the marketing and risks of nanomaterials that have long been used in agriculture.

Since July 2023, the issue of patents on living organisms has been at the heart of debates in the European Union. These debates were sparked by the European Commission’s proposal to stop assessing the risks associated with GMOs, to stop labelling them as such, and to put an end to their detection and identification. In December 2024, a conference allowed several stakeholders of the debate to express their opinion.

In July 2023, the proposal to deregulate GMOs obtained using new genetic modification techniques (known as “new genomic techniques” – NGTs) highlighted a sensitive issue that is still under discussion: patents. Patents are fiercely criticised for their many negative effects on the rights of farmers and traditional seed producers, as well as on biodiversity. A report commissioned by the European Green Party addresses this issue and suggests ways out of the impasse.

In January 2025, Poland, president of the Council of Europe, put a proposal on the table of EU member states to “solve” the patent problem that had arisen in the debate on deregulating GMOs obtained by new techniques. Complex and of uncertain effectiveness, the Polish proposal has plunged everyone into doubt. Discussions on this text may therefore not be concluded before Denmark, whose government supports total deregulation of GMOs, takes over the presidency of the European Union.

At a time when the European Union is preparing new regulations on seeds, a look at the meetings between MEPs and the various stakeholders indirectly shows the weight of the multinationals in these procedures. This raises questions about the imbalance in the representation of these parties and the potential consequences for small seed companies, farmers and peasants.