The change of genetically modified policy in document No. 1

In 2015, the No. 1 document of the Central Committee once again focused on the issues of agriculture, rural areas and farmers, and proposed for the first time to strengthen the research, safety management and science popularization of agricultural genetically modified biotechnology.

The popularization of genetically modified science has been written into document No. 1, although it is only a few words, it is highly expected by many people. This is the sixth time that transgenic technology has been mentioned in the Central Committee's No. 1 document in the past nine years. In 2007, it was first mentioned that the labelling system of genetically modified foods should be strictly implemented; in 2008, it was emphasized to launch major scientific and technological projects for the cultivation of new varieties of genetically modified organisms; in 2009 and 2010, it was proposed to speed up the promotion of major projects in genetically modified organisms; in 2012, the term "molecular breeding" was put forward, which is similar to that of genetically modified organisms. This is the first time that its popular science has been involved.

For many years, the scientific and industrial circles have been explaining to the public the necessity of transgenic technology. But for a variety of reasons, GM has become a drooling problem. Many of the so-called "discussions" are a waste of energy, and neither side can convince the other. The people involved in the debate often change, and each time the debater changes, the discussion goes back to the starting line. After countless rounds of war of words, some supporters of GM have been unable to speak the truth that has been said many times, while the reversals have fallen into the instinctive suspicion of "I just don't believe it." In addition, the GM debate is often mixed with other factors, such as political conspiracy theories, and the situation is even more chaotic.

Due to the chaos of public opinion, China has been stagnant in the industrialization of GM promotion, and the government's attitude towards GM has been stuck in the stage of "supporting scientific research and careful promotion" for a long time. However, the more important significance of transgenic technology lies in commercial applications, rather than in scientific research papers. There are some awkward scenes in China's current GM policy, such as planting is not allowed but import is allowed, staple grain is not allowed but raw materials are allowed to be imported. We have to say that they are all temporary concessions, not a long-term solution.

In order to break the deadlock in genetically modified genes, public awareness is the most difficult and necessary link. Therefore, the first mention of "strengthening the popularization of science" in document No. 1 was emphatically interpreted by all parties. The private interpretation has also received an official response. Song Hongyuan, director of the Rural Economic Research Center of the Ministry of Agriculture, who is one of the drafters of the document, said that the government hopes to popularize GM knowledge and reach a consensus. To strive for public understanding first, rather than directly relying on experts to formulate policies and create fait accompli, may seem conservative to some people. But in fact, only in this way can we make a more stable process and avoid repetition in the future.

But the difficulties are also obvious. Private science popularization of genetically modified technology has been carried out for many years, but the situation has never been clarified, and even some popular science users themselves have become the object of controversy. Of course, there are obvious advantages to strengthen the popularization of genetically modified technology at the national level, such as capital, manpower and other aspects are not comparable to individuals or non-governmental organizations. However, the biggest difficulty in the popularization of science and technology is not the resources, but the credibility of the organizers.

Therefore, the popularization of genetically modified science at the national level can mobilize more forces on the one hand, but should be well organized on the other hand. First of all, it is necessary to attract and reuse professionals, and when doing science popularization work, we should also adhere to openness and transparency, stand up to scrutiny in every link, and respond to questions as fully as possible. At the same time, we should also avoid repeated discussions, make steady progress, and take the discussion on GM away from the level of "war of words" at an early date. In short, GM science popularization, "attention" is only the beginning, the follow-up organizational work is the difficulty.