An Overview of the Development of Genetically Engineered Trees in

South America
Summary of issue

In the past ten years there has been an exponential increase in demand for wood and wood-fibre,
which has meant the expansion (from north to south) of industrial tree plantations, and the growth
of companies that supply it. In the rush to meet this massive demand which comes from a range
of industries, from the paper industry through to the rapidly growing industrial-scale bioenergy
sector companies are investing in risky new technologies in order to find ways to increase
productivity. This includes the development of genetically engineered trees (known as GE trees,
or transgenic trees): trees [are being] engineered to contain foreign DNA to give them unnatural
characteristics, such as the ability to kill insects, tolerate toxic herbicides, grow abnormally fast,
or have altered wood composition. 1

In 2003, following the 9th Conference of the Parties of the UN Framework Convention on Climate
Change (UNFCCC), northern companies and governments were permitted to use transgenic trees
in the establishment of carbon offset forestry plantation under the Clean Development
Mechanism.2 Moreover, the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) promoted research into
species considered suitable for such plantations eucalyptus in particular and has acted as one
of the main vehicles for convincing governments of the convenience of promoting such
plantations in their countries. 3

Rapid expansion of commercial tree plantations especially in tropical regions where there are
shorter rotation periods, a longer growth season, and cheap land and labour makes places like
South America, a perfect target for companies in the forestry sector. At the same time the
political, social and economic changes driven by neoliberalism in Latinamerica, have resulted in
new and widespread expropiation and privatisation of land and natural resources, paving the way
for a new era of neocolonialism (Harvey, 2004).4 Companies like Monsanto have taken advantage
of the situation and certainly found a perfect business scenario in countries like Argentina, where
70% of forests have been lost, mainly to transgenic soy plantations. This has had devastating
effects on biodiversity and the environment, and also on indigenous peoples, such as the
Mapuches in the north of the country.5

Corporations have begun the process of creating a vast range of commercial products from plant
matter as a replacement to fossil fuels. To this end the proponents promote the idea that trees are
an ideal feedstock for this purpose, with the aid of modern technologies, such as the genetic
engineering of trees. But in 2008 a strong campaign against GE trees6 resulted in the Convention
on Biological Diversity (CBD) recognising that the potential risks involved in the release of

1
Global Justice Ecology Project Briefing Paper, March 22, 2012. Analysis of the State of Genetically Engineered
Trees and Advanced Bioenergy.
2. http://cdm.unfccc.int/Reference/Documents/dec19_CP9/English/decisions_18_19_CP.9.pdf
http://globaljusticeecology.org/files/GE%20trees%20report%20with%20cover%203:12-small.pdf
2
Situacin mundial de los rboles genticamente modificados, Eco-sitio, 1 December 2009,
http://www.eco-sitio.com.ar/node/80
3
Los rboles Transgnicos, Organiccosumers.org, 2 January 2008,
http://www.organicconsumers.org/ACO/articulos/article_10007.cfm
4
El Modelo Sojero de Desarrollo en la Argentina: Consecuencias Sociales y Ambientales en la Era de Los
Agronegocios. Fernando Barri & Juan Wahren, 2009.
http://www.globalizate.org/Barri%20&%20Wahren%20la%20soja%20en%20Argentina.pdf
5
Neuquen: Mapuche defienden la Ley de Bosques, Avkin Pivke Mapu, 3 August 2012,
http://www.avkinpivkemapu.com.ar/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=3812&Itemid=15
6
STOP GE TREES campaign, www.stopgetreescampaign.org
genetically engineered trees outweigh the potential benefits, especially since many of those risks
are impossible to foresee and could have devastating consequences.7

Nevertheless, biotechnology multinationals are eagerly awaiting the opportunity to engage in the
large-scale commercial release of GE trees, even though the increasing demand for wood fibre is
being matched by a growing civil resistance to genetically engineered trees, in Latin America,8 as
well as in the United States and around the world.

What is at stake?

The detrimental impacts of monoculture tree plantations on the environment and on indigenous
peoples and local communities have been well documented, especially throughout South America,
where conflicts over land have been increasing. The introduction of GE trees can only exacerbate
those problems, with its direct and indirect impacts on ecosystems and on human kind.

Biodiversity
A 2008 paper on the potential impacts of GE trees9 states that genetic engineering processes can
result in hundreds of genome-wide mutations, especially where tissue culture techniques are
involved; furthermore, if genes for insect resistance escape into wild populations of trees, the
impacts would be broad, diverse and impossible to predict. Drifting pollen and/or seeds can
reach amazing distances and since trees have longer life-cycles than agricultural crops, the long-
term impacts on the natural world cannot yet be determined, unless a study that monitors the
whole tree life cycle is carried out, including impacts on offspring and interaction with biotic and
abiotic factors. So far, this remains undone.

Tropical rainforests are an important prop to continental water cycles; trees can regulate the run-
off and help guarantee water-supplies and prevent natural disasters.10 Yet the current crisis of
deforestation has reduced rainforests by over 60% in the past six decades.11 It is estimated that
neo-tropical forests in Central and South America sequester at least one ton of carbon per hectare
per year thanks to the increased biomass covering soils; conversely, the destruction of one hectare
of forest releases 200 tons of carbon.12

The advancement of the commercial release of GE trees puts tropical forests in even greater
danger, not only due to the conversion of native forests and other highly productive areas into GE
tree monocultures - with the associated increased release of CO2 - but also due to the possibility of
genetic contamination of native trees and other species, and the invasion of native forests with
non-native GMO trees. The spread of transgenes into the wild and the effect this will have on

7
Potential Ecological and Social Impacts of Genetically Engineered Trees - Commentary on
UNEP/CBD/COP/9/INF/27, Paper on Potential Impacts of GE Trees Prepared for CBD COP-9, Bonn, Germany
19-30 May 2008. GJEP, GFC, Econexus, Ecoropa, CBAN, Stop GE Trees, https://www.cbd.int/doc/external/cop-
09/gjep-analysis-en.pdf
8
Chile Sin Transgenicos is the largest anti-transgenic network in Latin America; RAPAL-Uruguay: Grupo de
Reflexin Rural (GRR) in Argentina.
9
Potential Ecological and Social Impacts of Genetically Engineered Trees Commentary on
UNEP/CBD/COP/9/INF/27. Paper on Potential Impacts of GE Trees. Prepared for CBD COP-9, Bonn, Germany
19-30 May 2008, submitted by the STOP GE Tree Campaign and other NGOs.
https://www.cbd.int/doc/external/cop-09/gjep-analysis-en.pdf
10
The worlds lungs. A Special report on Forests. The Economist. 25 September 2010.
http://www.economist.com/node/21521705; Forests in a Changing Climate, Friends of the Earth International,
2008 http://www.criticalcollective.org/?publication=forests-in-a-changing-climate
11
Seeing the Wood, A Special Report on Forests - The Economist, 25 September 2010.
http://www.economist.com/node/17062713
12
Situacin mundial de los rboles genticamente modificados, Eco-sitio, 1 December 2009, http://www.eco-
sitio.com.ar/node/80
biodiversity may be especially severe in less developed countries,13 countries that have also
suffered more from climate change phenomena. Furthermore, trees engineered for resistance to
insects or herbicides--or that have reduced lignin levels--have dangerous impacts on wildlife and
communities. For instance, migratory bird species rely heavily on the extremely productive and
complex rainforest ecosystems for food, rest and recovery.14 The caterpillars targeted by BT
insect-resistant trees are a key food for nesting songbirds. In addition, rapidly growing GE trees
dehydrate soils rapidly and can even impact water tables and exacerbate drought conditions.

Potential Deployment of GE Tree Technology will Promote Further Impoverishment

of Rural Communities

The Brazilian forestry sector is responsible for around 5% of GDP, and Brazil is recognised
worldwide as one of the leaders in the development and implementation of innovations in the area
of genetics and forestry, most notably with eucalyptus.15

Companies like US-based GE tree research and development company ArborGen which has a
request pending with the US Deparment of Agriculture (USDA) to sell hundreds of millions of
cold-tolerant GE eucalyptus seedlings commercially every year16 has already entered the South
American market and is partnering with different institutions, universities and companies not only
in Brazil but throughout South America. Brazil already has 4.7 million ha of non-GMO eucalyptus
trees planted in a race to expand agrofuel production and exploit its natural resources to the fullest.
Industry hopes that transgenic eucalyptus will be deregulated and commercially planted in Brazil
within the next few years.17

FuturaGen (owned by Rio+20 sponsor, Suzano) is currently on the verge of releasing their fourth
regulatory field trial over the past eight months, assessing enhanced eucalyptus. After
completion, FuturaGen plans to submit a dossier to the Brazilian National Technical Commission
on Biosafety (CTNBio) requesting regulatory approval to deploy its yield-enhanced eucalyptus.18
In June 2010 the Studies and Projects Finance Organization (FINEP) a public company
managed by the Ministry of Science and Technology granted FuturaGen, US$1.2 million for
advanced plantation forestry for bioenergy research. As of 2009, Suzano, owner of 310,000 ha of
eucalyptus plantations in Brazil, received permission to buildfive plants designed to process wood
into pellets by 2019, for sale as fuel to European thermoelectric biomass facilities.

Evidently, what is practiced today in Brazil as new developmentism has inherited a great deal
from the national development strategies that were devised from the 1950s onwards by the
Economic Commission for Latin America (ECLA), and several large-scale projects from the times
of the military dictatorship have been revived.19 But the perception of the Brazilian development
model, which is seen as a great success by many in other countries, is rather different amongst

13
Why is release of transgenic crops into the environment a risk?, Sierra Club,
http://www.sierraclub.org/biotech/references.asp
14
A birds eye view of deforestation, World Migratory Bird Day, May 2011,
http://www.worldmigratorybirdday.org/2011/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=46&Itemid=28
15
Genomica do eucalipto no Congreso de Florestas Energticas, EMBRAPA, 5 June 2009,
http://www.embrapa.br/imprensa/noticias/2009/junho/1a-semana/genomica-do-eucalipto-no-congresso-de-
florestas-energeticas/?searchterm=eucalyptus
16
Global Justice Ecology Project Briefing Paper, March 22, 2012. Analysis of the State of Genetically Engineered
Trees and Advanced Bioenergy.
http://globaljusticeecology.org/files/GE%20trees%20report%20with%20cover%203:12-small.pdf
17
Toward Commercialization Of Genetically Engineered Forests: Economic And Social Considerations. Sedjo,
2006. http://www.rff.org/rff/documents/rff-rpt-commercializationgeforests.pdf
18
FuturaGen, press release, Sao Paulo, 2 May 2012, http://www.futuragene.com/Futuragene-Brazil-field-trials.pdf
19
Inside a Champion: An Analysis of the Brazilian Development Model. Introduction. Heinrich Boll Foundation, 7
June 2012. Brazil. http://www.boell.de/publications/publications-brazil-inside-a-champion-economy-ecology-
14760.html
Brazilian civil society. Critics say that this model incurs considerable social and ecological
damage as well as significant costs. In this light, it is not so surprising that the Brazilian
government might give the green light, in order to be the first country to officially deploy GE
trees, at the expense of its natural resources and its peoples, generating significant profits for a
few.

Other countries in Latin America may follow suit or even get there first. Back in 2004,
Monsantos former global forestry chief stated that Chileans could be the first to enter the market
with a transgenic tree as they have a targeted goal, relationships with the government and the
necessary infrastructure to reach this goal.20 Since 1974 a decree on forest resources encouraged
the development of large-scale tree plantations of exotic species, and subsidised 75% of the
associated costs. As a result, there are over 2 million ha of these plantations on ancestral
indigenous territories, especially in the south, which has led to displacement and impoverishment
of Mapuche communities.21 For instance, in the Lumaco District of Chile, the standard for
planting tree monocultures on the agricultural lands of indigenous Mapuche communities, through
the use of financial coercion that forced small farmers to grow trees instead of food, has led to
60% of Mapuche families in the region living in poverty, with 33% in extreme poverty.22

Between 2002 and 2005 projects investigating the use of eucalyptus with insecticidal properties
and resistance to fungus were being developed by the Universidad de la Frontera with suppport
from Innova Chile. In 2004-2007, cold tolerant eucalyptus were developed by the Universidad de
Concepcin and the Universidad Andrs Bello, for the company Arauco. In addition, Chile
became the first Latin American country to promote UPOV 91,23 which deals with restricting
farmers right to save and re-use transgenic seeds. Countries such as Brazil and Argentina have
not so far succeeded in pushing through with this highly controversial policy,24 so it could well be
that the first authorisation for the deployment of GE trees comes from Chile.

In Argentina, a forest emergency was declared in 2006 due to a severe loss of native forests, and
although this effort led to a reduction in the rate of deforestation it has not stopped the expansion
of soy monocultures, and it made no reference to the potential threats posed by GE tree
plantations25. Conversely, in June 2012, Argentinian president Kirchner celebrated Monsantos
plans to invest more than USD 358,000,000 in Argentina. She stated: Monsantos investment is
highly important as it will help materialize our plans both for food by 2020 and industry as well
[] and I said to myself, today, reading in your headline that you were impressed by the
significant support that our government has given to science and technology. Please be sure that
we will keep on in the same line. 26

Despite the lack of information about the current status of GE tree research in Argentina, the only
report by the FAO (2004) regarding this issue acknowledged Argentina as carrying out lab
experimentation as early as 199927. Nowadays, the National Institute for Agricultural Technology
(INTA) and the Center for Forestry Research and Experiences (CIEF) are conducting a series of

20
Cultivos transgnicos en Chile, Observatorio de Economa Latinoamericana,
http://www.eumed.net/cursecon/ecolat/cl/srn-transg.htm
21
Lovera, S. 2012. In press.
Lucio Cuenca B., National Coordinator for the Observatorio Latinoamericano de Conflictos
22

Ambientales (OLCA), speaking at a meeting on GE Trees in Vitoria, Brazil in November 2005.

23
International Convention on the Protection of New Plant Varieties
http://www.upov.int/en/publications/conventions/1991/act1991.htm
24
Wikileaks y transgnicos, EE.UU. hizo lobby por la propriedad intelectual en Chile, 6 July 2011,
http://verdadahora.cl/wikileaks_y_transgenicos_ee_uu_hizo_lobby_por_la_propiedad_intelectual_en_chile.html
25
Personal communication, Carlos A. Vicente, GRAIN-Argentina.
26
La presidenta feliz por inversin en transgnicos de Monsanto, 19 June 2012,
http://www.noalamina.org/mineria-informacion-general/general/la-presidenta-feliz-por-inversion-en-transgenicos-
de-monsanto
27
Preliminary review of biotechnology in forestry, including genetic modification. UN FAO, 2004
http://www.fao.org/docrep/008/ae574e/ae574e00.htm
activities related to the genetics, improvement and propagation of eucalyptus tree species for
enhanced growth.28 The above-mentioned alliance could mean that Argentina which didnt
ratify the Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety could also be interested in developing GE trees.
This would create serious additional burdens impacting Argentinas ecosystems and communities,
especially the Mapuche People, who have confronted a long and tough struggle against
monoculture tree plantation companies.

Paraguay, where communities have also suffered from the impacts of soy expansion, is preparing
for the release of five varieties of transgenic corn; the current government is explicitly in favour of
genetic technologies. Likewise, Uruguay has lost a significant amount of forest cover to
monocultures; and Forestal Oriental holds 35,000 ha of eucalyptus tree plantations, and has
already conducted field trials for two years, concerning herbicide resistance and reduced wood
lignin traits.29 In Colombia, in 2009, the forest industry analysed the possibility of its paper and
biofuel companies using GE trees to produce ethanol,30 with help from experts from the Sa Paulo
University; and people from the Agricultural Sciences department at the Agronomic Center of the
National University in Medellin started trials with eucalyptus and poplar.31

In countries like Per, on the other hand, there is a moratorium against any Living Modified
Organism entering the country for cultivation and harvesting, or for any other purposes related to
transgenic products. Yet this moratorium could be threatened by the commercial release of GE
trees in Brazil and/or other neighbouring countries as it raises transboundary contaminaton
concerns.

Another important aspect of this emerging forest products sector is the extent to which transgenic
wood (as opposed to germplasm) is internationally tradable. According to industry think-tank
Resources for the Future, under WTO rules, non-living transgenic wood, whether raw logs or
wood products, cannot be restricted in international trade simply because it is transgenic.32

What should happen at COP 11 and beyond?

The years 2012 and 2013 are going to be significant ones for the campaign to stop genetically
engineered trees. This means that the Meeting of the Parties of the Cartegea Protocol, as well as
the Convention on Biological Diversitys 11th Conference of the Parties, need to recognise the
threat that GE trees pose, especially given the current scenario of escalating demand for wood for
bioenergy.

Parties must apply the precautionary principle as part of their decision regarding risk assessments
relating to the movement of GE trees across state boundaries. Furthermore, the COP must enact a
moratorium on the use of GE trees in bioenergy production or forest offset schemes. There are still
too many unknowns and too many indications that the escape of genes from GE trees released into
the environment will then be both inevitable and potentially disastrous, both for forest ecosystems
and for forest-dependent communities.

28
Argentina camino a la fatalidad copiando modelo forestal chileno, World Rainforest Movement,
http://www.wrm.org.uy/paises/Argentina/modelo.html
29
Informe de la situacin de los transgnicos en Uruguay y bioseguridad, Por Mara Isabel Crcamo, RAP-AL
Uruguay,
http://webs.chasque.net/~rapaluy1/transgenicos/Uruguay/Informe_transgenicos_Uruguay.html
30
En Colombia analizan experimentar con rboles transgnicos, espanol.upi.com, 9 November 2009,
http://espanol.upi.com/Curiosidades/2009/11/09/En-Colombia-analizan-experimentar-con-%C3%A1rboles-
transg%C3%A9nicos/UPI-57611257761940/
31
Argentina aprueba maz genticamente modificado, 2 August 2012,
http://www.agrobio.org/news/
32
Toward Commercialization Of Genetically Engineered Forests: Economic And Social Considerations. Sedjo,
2006. http://www.rff.org/rff/documents/rff-rpt-commercializationgeforests.pdf
More information:

Isis Alvarez, Global Forest Coalition isis.alvarez@globalforestcoalition.org,

Anne Petermann, Global Justice Ecology Project anne@globaljusticeecology.org
Websites: www.globalforestcoalition.org / http://globaljusticeecology.org/