By Jamie Martin
In late 2024, a court overturned the USDA’s SECURE rule, forcing the agency to return to outdated regulations from the 1980s. These legacy rules have slowed progress in agricultural biotechnology by requiring lengthy reviews based on outdated methods, delaying the use of new crop innovations.
Modern biotech products like insect-resistant maize, herbicide-tolerant canola, and gene-edited livestock have improved farm productivity, cut costs, and supported environmental sustainability. Yet, regulatory barriers are holding back wider adoption.
Biotech advances have also helped reduce pesticide use, increase yields, and cut greenhouse gas emissions. Gene editing has recently produced heat-resistant cattle and pigs resistant to PRRS, which could save U.S. farms over $1.2 billion each year.
To unlock future innovations, USDA should develop a product- and risk-based regulation system. Instead of regulating all genetically modified organisms (GMOs), a “red flag” approach would focus on products with potentially harmful traits, regardless of how they were created.
Under this model, products with traits known to pose environmental or health risks—like those that produce pharmaceutical compounds—would go through review. Low-risk products would face fewer delays and developers could still request voluntary confirmation from USDA if needed.
“USDA must take the opportunity presented by the current reversion to the legacy regulations to draft a new rule that improves upon both the legacy regulations and the SECURE rule to better match premarket review with the actual risks of new products.”
To succeed, the USDA and Congress must ensure proper staffing and funding for agencies managing the application process. Without updated rules, U.S. agriculture could fall behind global competitors like Brazil in cost and efficiency.
Now is the time for smarter biotech policies that boost farm incomes, protect the environment, and strengthen the food system.
Photo Credit: usda
Categories: National