The World Conservation Congress in Abu Dhabi is set to discuss a crucial issue: the use of genetic engineering (GE) in nature conservation. Over 90 non-governmental organisations (NGOs) are urging a global pause, called a moratorium, on releasing genetically engineered wild species into the environment. They want this until the potential impacts are fully understood.
Two main proposals are being considered by the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) members. One supports using synthetic biology as a conservation tool, with decisions made case-by-case. The other calls for a complete stop on releasing GE wild species. This is until environmental risks, regulatory gaps, and ethical concerns are properly addressed.
Proposed GE projects are ambitious. They include making endangered species immune to diseases, using gene drives to eliminate invasive species, and even trying to bring back extinct animals like the dodo or Tasmanian tiger. This would be done by genetically modifying existing species.
However, many organisations and scientists are raising concerns. Franziska Achterberg, Head of Policy at Save Our Seeds, stated, “There is no evidence that these technologies will help protect or restore nature. They remain experimental, with highly uncertain outcomes.” She added that the IUCN should not endorse such irreversible technologies too soon, as it could harm conservation efforts and public trust.
The call for a moratorium has brought together more than 90 NGOs from around the world. Scientists and beekeeping groups also support this call. Dr Joann Sy, Scientific Advisor at POLLINIS, a main supporter of the moratorium motion, explained, “These new technologies risk adding to the pressures already threatening pollinators and nature. Our species and ecosystems are already under immense stress; instead of building resilience, such gambles could further weaken them.”
Advocates for the moratorium argue that releasing GE organisms into the wild has unpredictable and irreversible consequences. Malick Shahbaz Ahmed, Executive Director of the Sungi Development Foundation, highlighted, “Releasing genetically engineered organisms into the wild is irreversible. Nature is not a laboratory, and our communities are not test subjects.” He stressed that livelihoods depend on natural cycles, which could be disrupted, putting both ecosystems and communities at risk.
Genetic engineering represents a significant change from traditional conservation methods. The IUCN has previously shown caution. In 2004, it called for a moratorium on releasing GMOs, and in 2016, members voted against the use of gene drives. In 2021, the organisation delayed a decision, asking for a more inclusive process to create a policy on GE in conservation.
The IUCN’s decision will likely influence global conservation policies. With the planet facing a major extinction event, this debate questions the core principles of nature conservation. Should humanity use genetic engineering to intervene in the natural world?
The moratorium motion is supported by several IUCN members, including POLLINIS (France), Nature Canada (Canada), and the Sungi Development Foundation (Pakistan). Many other NGOs, scientists, and international beekeeping organisations have also backed the call.