No “undo button” for nature: IUCN must say no to engineered wild species

Over 90 NGOs urge mora­to­ri­um on genet­ic engi­neer­ing in the wild as World Con­ser­va­tion Con­gress meets in Abu Dhabi

Civ­il soci­ety groups warn: exper­i­men­tal genet­ic tech­nolo­gies risk irre­versible harm to ecosys­tems and com­mu­ni­ty liveli­hoods.

Abu Dhabi, 8 Octo­ber 2025 – The world’s most influ­en­tial nature con­ser­va­tion organ­i­sa­tion will decide whether to pro­mote genet­ic engi­neer­ing as a tool for nature con­ser­va­tion at this year’s IUCN World Con­ser­va­tion Con­gress in Abu Dhabi, Unit­ed Arab Emi­rates.

Two motions are being con­sid­ered by IUCN mem­bers: one that would posi­tion syn­thet­ic biol­o­gy as a tool for nature con­ser­va­tion, sub­ject to case-by-case deci­sion-mak­ing, and anoth­er call­ing for a glob­al mora­to­ri­um on releas­ing genet­i­cal­ly engi­neered wild species until envi­ron­men­tal impacts, reg­u­la­to­ry gaps, as well as eth­i­cal and cul­tur­al con­cerns are addressed.

Pro­posed genet­ic engi­neer­ing projects range from immu­nis­ing threat­ened species against dis­eases, to using gene dri­ves to erad­i­cate inva­sive species, to the so-called revival of extinct icon­ic ani­mals, such as the dodo, the dire wolf, or Tas­man­ian tiger, through genet­ic mod­i­fi­ca­tion of exist­ing species.

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

There is no evi­dence that these tech­nolo­gies will help pro­tect or restore nature. They remain exper­i­men­tal, with high­ly uncer­tain out­comes. The IUCN should not pre­ma­ture­ly endorse irre­versible tech­nolo­gies that risk under­min­ing both con­ser­va­tion efforts and the pub­lic trust they depend on.

The call for a mora­to­ri­um has unit­ed over 90 NGOs span­ning all con­ti­nents, from POLLINIS in France to the Coor­di­nado­ra de Orga­ni­za­ciones Indí­ge­nas de la Cuen­ca Amazóni­ca in Ecuador. Renowned sci­en­tists and bee­keep­ing organ­i­sa­tions have also endorsed the call for a mora­to­ri­um.

Dr. Joann Sy, Sci­en­tif­ic Advi­sor at POLLINIS, the motion’s pri­ma­ry spon­sor:

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. We must stop inter­ven­tions that could under­mine, rather than strength­en, the urgent work of nature con­ser­va­tion.

Mora­to­ri­um advo­cates argue that the con­se­quences of releas­ing engi­neered organ­isms into the nat­ur­al envi­ron­ment are both unpre­dictable and irre­versible.

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

Releas­ing genet­i­cal­ly engi­neered organ­isms into the wild is irre­versible. Nature is not a lab­o­ra­to­ry, and our com­mu­ni­ties are not test sub­jects. Our liveli­hoods and well-being depend on the nat­ur­al cycles of soil, water, plants, pol­li­na­tors, and species. When these cycles are dis­rupt­ed, both ecosys­tems and com­mu­ni­ties are at risk. That is why the pro­posed mora­to­ri­um is essen­tial — to ensure that deci­sions on new tech­nolo­gies are guid­ed by pre­cau­tion, eco­log­i­cal integri­ty, and the voic­es of the most vul­ner­a­ble.

Genet­ic engi­neer­ing marks a rad­i­cal break from tra­di­tion­al con­ser­va­tion — an attempt to ‘redesign‘ rather than pro­tect nature. The IUCN has pre­vi­ous­ly shown cau­tion toward these tech­nolo­gies. In 2004, it called for a mora­to­ri­um on the fur­ther release of GMOs, and in 2016, mem­bers reject­ed the use of gene dri­ves. In 2021, the organ­i­sa­tion post­poned a deci­sion on genet­ic engi­neer­ing, call­ing instead for an inclu­sive and par­tic­i­pa­to­ry process to devel­op an IUCN pol­i­cy on genet­ic engi­neer­ing in con­ser­va­tion.

The IUC­N’s deci­sion is like­ly to influ­ence con­ser­va­tion pol­i­cy world­wide regard­ing whether genet­ic engi­neer­ing is viewed as just anoth­er tool to address bio­di­ver­si­ty loss and cli­mate change. With the plan­et expe­ri­enc­ing its sixth mass extinc­tion, the debate rais­es fun­da­men­tal ques­tions about the prin­ci­ples of nature con­ser­va­tion and whether human­i­ty should inter­vene in nature through genet­ic engi­neer­ing.

The mora­to­ri­um motion is spon­sored by IUCN mem­bers POLLINIS (France), Nature Cana­da (Cana­da), Nature Trop­i­cale (Benin), Deutsch­er Naturschutzring (Ger­many), Benin Envi­ron­ment and Edu­ca­tion Soci­ety (Benin), Pro Natura/Friends of the Earth Switzer­land (Switzer­land), Sun­gi Devel­op­ment Foun­da­tion (Pak­istan), and Coor­di­nado­ra de Orga­ni­za­ciones Indí­ge­nas de la Cuen­ca Amazóni­ca (Ecuador).

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.

Media con­tacts:

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

Hélène Angot, Com­mu­ni­ca­tions Offi­cer, Polli­nis, +33 6 12 84 06 97,

Mal­ick Shah­baz Ahmed, Exec­u­tive Direc­tor of the Sun­gi Devel­op­ment Foun­da­tion,

Notes to edi­tors:

• A full list of NGO sup­port­ers is avail­able on the coali­tion web­site.
• Renowned sci­en­tists have signed an open let­ter in sup­port of the mora­to­ri­um.
• Inter­na­tion­al bee­keep­ing organ­i­sa­tions, includ­ing Api­mon­dia, BeeL­ife Europe, and the Ger­man Bee­keep­ers’ Asso­ci­a­tion, have pub­licly endorsed the mora­to­ri­um.
• Back­ground mate­r­i­al: The ratio­nale for an IUCN mora­to­ri­um and infor­ma­tion on genet­ic engi­neer­ing approach­es pro­posed for nature con­ser­va­tion are avail­able here.
• Case stud­ies: Five exam­ples of genet­ic engi­neer­ing pro­pos­als in con­ser­va­tion are avail­able here.

Pour lire ce com­mu­niqué de presse en français, cliquez ici.