Often presented as technical updates designed to promote innovation and efficiency, these reforms could instead accelerate agricultural uniformity, strengthen corporate concentration, and further erode biodiversity. At stake are farmers’ autonomy, Europe’s food cultures, and citizens’ right to know what is in their food.
In this policy position and advocacy long‑read, Slow Food looks at the combined impact of the proposed deregulation of new genetically modified organisms, known as New Genomic Techniques (NGTs), and the reform of the Plant Reproductive Material (PRM) Regulation on seeds. Through the voices of farmers and cooks from across its European network, Slow Food argues that, if adopted in their current form, these proposals would move Europe further away from food democracy and an agroecological transition.
What’s at stake
If the proposals move forward as they stand, Europe risks losing transparency around genetically engineered food, farmers’ freedom to remain GMO‑free, and seed diversity, a cornerstone of climate resilience, ecological balance, and public health. Europe’s regional food cultures and culinary identities are also at risk, along with democratic control over a food system increasingly shaped by patents and market concentration. This is not a technical adjustment, but a decisive moment for Europe’s food sovereignty, taste, and ecological future.
Two reforms, one direction
Although legally distinct, the two legislative proposals reinforce each other and point in the same direction. They promote standardized crops, patented seeds, and shrinking agency for farmers, food artisans, cooks, and citizens. Together, they risk locking Europe into an outdated agricultural model at a time when agroecology is urgently needed to respond to climate change and biodiversity loss.
The first proposal concerns the deregulation of New Genomic Techniques, often referred to as “new GMOs”. If approved, most NGT‑derived plants would no longer be subject to risk assessment, traceability, or mandatory labelling.
For almost three decades, these safeguards have guaranteed a minimum level of transparency in Europe’s food system. Removing them would allow genetically engineered crops to circulate invisibly, from fields to supermarket shelves. Slow Food has repeatedly warned that this approach ignores the risks of contamination of organic and traditional varieties, reinforces industrial farming models, undermines farmers’ freedom to choose GMO‑free production, and deprives consumers of informed choice. Without labelling and traceability, freedom of choice for farmers, cooks, and citizens simply cannot exist.
Seed regulation (PRM): pressure on small farmers
The second reform concerns the “Plant Reproductive Material Regulation”, which governs how seeds are registered, certified, and marketed across the EU. While presented as a harmonisation effort, the proposal is largely shaped around the logic of large‑scale commercial seed trade.
In practice, it risks becoming overly restrictive and ill‑suited to small farmers, seed savers, and artisanal breeders, particularly when it comes to saving, using, and exchanging seeds. As Slow Food already highlighted in 2025, such rules could push small operators out of the legal framework altogether, despite their essential role in conserving agrobiodiversity and adapting seeds to local ecosystems. Combined with the deregulation of new GMOs, the reform would further entrench patented seeds and corporate concentration.
Biodiversity: the foundation we risk losing
Europe’s richness of flavours, shapes, and food cultures is rooted in agrobiodiversity, safeguarded over millennia by farmers who save, select, and exchange seeds adapted to local conditions. Yet decades of industrial agriculture have already driven most edible plant species to the brink of disappearance. Introducing unlabelled and untraceable genetically engineered crops into this fragile system risks accelerating this loss.
“During the growing season, we cultivate around 100 different species and varieties of vegetables, fruits, and herbs. Diversity is not just part of production — it is a core value. That is why I am concerned that unlabelled NGT seeds could limit farmers’ freedom of choice and increase dependence on uniform, patented seeds. Our customers must be able to trust that our vegetables come from non‑GMO seeds. Trust is the foundation.”
These concerns are reinforced by evidence showing that most new GM plants nearing commercialisation are herbicide‑tolerant, strengthening chemical‑dependent agriculture instead of supporting sustainable transitions.
Seeds, power, and farmer sovereignty
Seeds are not just agricultural inputs. They carry knowledge, culture, and generations of collective wisdom. Seed sovereignty — the right to save, exchange, and improve seeds — is essential to resilient food systems.
Once seeds become proprietary, they can no longer circulate freely as part of a shared heritage. Patents concentrate power and deepen farmers’ dependency. This trajectory also clashes with public opinion: a large majority of Europeans oppose patents on plants and animals.
World’s First GMO Wheat Gets ‘More Real’ After US Approval
“The seasons have changed significantly over the last ten years. I learned to observe the land closely and adapt crops and practices locally. Nurturing the soil, saving and sharing seeds, and exchanging knowledge within the community is how resilience is built. Imposing external fixes that ignore local realities undermines this balance.”
The taste of diversity
The consequences of biodiversity loss are felt most clearly in the kitchen. Culinary traditions depend on ingredients shaped by place, season, and varietal diversity. Cooks who work closely with farmers know the value of traceability and trust.
“Seed diversity adds variety, creativity, and meaning to cooking. A dish centred on beets would be very boring without different colours, flavours, and textures. Adapting crops to local conditions also enables innovation and shorter supply chains. To avoid monotony, we should not standardise crops.”
Without transparency, cooks and consumers would lose the ability to choose knowingly, becoming unwilling participants in the erosion of agrobiodiversity and cultural heritage.
Agroecology as the way forward
Agroecology offers a realistic and necessary alternative to technological shortcuts. By working with ecological complexity, it regenerates soils, enhances biodiversity, and builds resilience. Where deregulation promotes uniformity, agroecology empowers local adaptation and living food cultures.
Call to action
The debate over new GMOs and seed legislation is not only technical; it is democratic. Without clear rules on risk assessment, labelling, patenting, and traceability, informed choice becomes impossible.
Slow Food calls on EU institutions and Members of the European Parliament to protect biodiversity, defend farmers’ rights to seeds, reject patents on plants and animals, and anchor European food policy firmly in agroecology. The future of Europe’s seeds, flavours, and food identities depends on decisions taken today
