The experts were asked to focus on the scientific criteria and procedures for effective protocol design and to broadly address the technical aspects of monitoring. Some of the conclusions reached are itemized below. The experts were unanimous in concluding that monitoring programmes need to be developed in ways that recognize important sources of variation between farming systems and GM crop types. The effects (both positive and negative) of GM crops will vary with location and context, and monitoring will require a new model of working in order to inform actions at the farming system level. The main conclusions reached in the working sessions are summarized below.
The experts discussed data needs and development of minimum datasets. The challenge will be to address variation within and between countries in: (i) regulatory requirements; (ii) the organisms, process and systems to be monitored; and (iii) individual goals for monitoring programmes.
All possible sources of data should be taken into account and identified including biodiversity surveys and inventories, soil databases, genebanks, plant protection services, farmer organizations, private sector (including sales figures), plant variety rights agencies, pre-release monitoring databases, environmental groups and water authorities.
The experts recommended that coordinators of post-release monitoring be appointed (possibly from the lead GM regulatory agency) for coordinating the collection of data, compiling the information in an appropriate way and performing the analysis and reporting. The challenge will be to link data sources and systems that were not set up for this purpose.
The experts made a case for the broad surveillance of practices in farming system that are to include GM crops. The specifics of the monitoring programme depend on the GM trait, and the farming system and the broader (natural and managed) habitat context. Agricultural systems have unique social, economic and environmental properties.
The experts also presented several challenges for the scientific and technical development of monitoring including differences between farmers, environmental groups and agencies in perceptions of risks and benefits, lack of available expertise, absence of extension services and lack of available resources.
