21 hours ago / Gene Drives / IUCN / Nature conservation

IUCN backs risky genetic engineering in nature, rejects call for precaution

Close vote reveals divi­sions in IUCN mem­ber­ship over genet­ic engi­neer­ing

Abu Dhabi, 15 Octo­ber 2025 — In a wide­ly antic­i­pat­ed but deeply con­cern­ing deci­sion, IUCN mem­bers have implic­it­ly endorsed the use of genet­ic engi­neer­ing in nature con­ser­va­tion — despite insuf­fi­cient sci­en­tif­ic evi­dence and the absence of effec­tive reg­u­la­tions to man­age its risks.

By reject­ing a pro­posed mora­to­ri­um on high-risk appli­ca­tions such as gene dri­ves, IUCN has decid­ed to ignore the need for ade­quate safe­guards against irre­versible harm to nature. These tech­nolo­gies could per­ma­nent­ly alter or erad­i­cate species, trig­ger­ing cas­cad­ing effects across entire ecosys­tems.

To pass, the motion need­ed more than 50% sup­port in both cat­e­gories — gov­ern­ments and non-gov­ern­men­tal organ­i­sa­tions  — and it came down to a very close call. Among gov­ern­ments, the result was 87 in favour and 88 against, falling short by the vote of just one gov­ern­ment. Among non-gov­ern­men­tal organ­i­sa­tions, the result was 407 in favour and 323 against. 

Franziska Achter­berg, Head of Pol­i­cy at Save Our Seeds, a sup­port­er of the mora­to­ri­um motion:

Today’s deci­sion sug­gests IUCN mem­bers are plac­ing their hopes in high-risk tech­nolo­gies with uncer­tain out­comes. Nature can­not afford exper­i­ments with poten­tial­ly severe, irre­versible out­comes — proven con­ser­va­tion mea­sures must take pri­or­i­ty over spec­u­la­tive genet­ic engi­neer­ing.

Over 100 sci­en­tists — includ­ing con­trib­u­tors to the Inter­gov­ern­men­tal Sci­ence-Pol­i­cy Plat­form on Bio­di­ver­si­ty and Ecosys­tem Ser­vices (IPBES) — have also urged cau­tion. In an open let­ter released ahead of the vote, they warned that releas­ing genet­i­cal­ly engi­neered organ­isms into ecosys­tems could cause irre­versible eco­log­i­cal dis­rup­tions.

Dr Joann Sy, Sci­en­tif­ic Advi­sor, Polli­nis, the main spon­sor of the mora­to­ri­um motion:

The ques­tion remains whether the genet­ic engi­neer­ing of wild species tru­ly aligns with IUCN’s mis­sion to pro­tect nature’s integri­ty and diver­si­ty. Eval­u­at­ing each appli­ca­tion sep­a­rate­ly does not address the deep­er eth­i­cal and eco­log­i­cal issues at stake.

Mal­ick Shah­baz Ahmed, Exec­u­tive Direc­tor of the Sun­gi Devel­op­ment Foun­da­tion, a co-spon­sor of the mora­to­ri­um motion:

It is alarm­ing to see how a few well-resourced tech­nol­o­gy devel­op­ers have man­aged to shape IUCN’s agen­da. Most mem­bers are unlike­ly to embrace genet­ic engi­neer­ing in nature con­ser­va­tion, yet the organ­i­sa­tion as a whole has failed to dis­tance itself from high-risk tech­nolo­gies dri­ven by com­mer­cial inter­ests. Deci­sions on new tech­nolo­gies that could endan­ger nature must be guid­ed by pre­cau­tion, integri­ty, and the voic­es of the most vul­ner­a­ble.

ENDS

About Save Our Seeds 

Save Our Seeds is a cam­paign run by the Ger­man Foun­da­tion on Future Farm­ing. Since 2002, it has suc­cess­ful­ly spear­head­ed efforts to avoid GMO con­t­a­m­i­na­tion of seeds and main­tain pre­cau­tion­ary GMO leg­is­la­tion at nation­al and EU lev­els. The Foun­da­tion on Future Farm­ing is a mem­ber of Deutsch­er Naturschutzring (DNR), a co-spon­sor of the mora­to­ri­um motion.  

About POLLINIS

POLLINIS is an inde­pen­dent NGO work­ing to pro­tect domes­tic and wild bees and pro­mote agri­cul­ture that respects all pol­li­na­tors. Found­ed in 2012, the non-prof­it organ­i­sa­tion now has more than 1.3 mil­lion sup­port­ers across Europe and over 20,000 donors. POLLINIS is fund­ed exclu­sive­ly by dona­tions from indi­vid­u­als, which guar­an­tees its absolute inde­pen­dence. Co-spon­sor and sup­port Motion 133 on a mora­to­ri­um on genet­i­cal­ly engi­neer­ing wild species in nat­ur­al ecosys­tems.

About Sun­gi Devel­op­ment Foun­da­tion 

Sun­gi Devel­op­ment Foun­da­tion, Pak­istan, is a rights-based com­mu­ni­ty-dri­ven organ­i­sa­tion advanc­ing cli­mate action. We empow­er vul­ner­a­ble com­mu­ni­ties by strength­en­ing their capac­i­ty in nature-based solu­tions, bio­di­ver­si­ty con­ser­va­tion, indige­nous farm­ing and social forestry to mit­i­gate cli­mate change.

Notes to edi­tors:

  • More and more pro­pos­als are being made to genet­i­cal­ly engi­neer nature – not only domes­ti­cat­ed crops and live­stock, but wild species with­in com­plex ecosys­tems. Pro­pos­als range from erad­i­cat­ing mos­qui­to pop­u­la­tions and inva­sive species (such as mice, rab­bits or snails), to mak­ing endan­gered ani­mals dis­ease-resis­tant or even ‘reviv­ing’ extinct species (such as the mam­moth or the dire wolf).
  • Motion 133, reject­ed by the IUCN Con­gress, calls on IUCN mem­bers not to con­sid­er the release of genet­i­cal­ly engi­neered wild organ­isms or gene silenc­ing tech­nolo­gies until the IUCN World Con­ser­va­tion Con­gress for­mal­ly votes to decide oth­er­wise.
  • Motion 087, adopt­ed by the IUCN Con­gress, pro­motes a case-by-case approach for any appli­ca­tion of syn­thet­ic biol­o­gy, dis­re­gard­ing dif­fer­ences in risk pro­files.
  • Over 100 sci­en­tists signed an open let­ter sup­port­ing the call for a pre­cau­tion­ary pause. The let­ter is avail­able here. 

More back­ground:

Media con­tacts:

Franziska Achter­berg, Head of Pol­i­cy, Save Our Seeds, , +32 498 362403

Maria Ele­na De Mat­teo, Com­mu­ni­ca­tions Strate­gist, +82 10 68 35 59 66,

Helene Angot, Com­mu­ni­ca­tions Offi­cer,  +33 6 12 84 06 97,  

Mal­ick Shah­baz Ahmed, Exec­u­tive Direc­tor of the Sun­gi Devel­op­ment Foun­da­tion, , +92 300 5556324

Tags:
to top