Resolution 1.

33

#gmNO

Sponsors: Iraq, Russian Federation, Greece, Nepal, Nigeria

Signatories: Philippines, Panama, Sweden, India, New Zealand, Germany, United Kingdom,
Peru, Japan, Australia, Chile
Topic: “Heavier Regulation of Biotechnology”

The UNEP,

Reminding all nations that biotechnology needs to be restricted to a certain extent until everyone
understands what each biotechnological advancement does to the environment and surrounding
ecosystems,

Noting that biotechnology is still very new to the modern agricultural world and scientists are
still in the process of making new advancements concerning the matter,

Stressing the fact that biotechnology may have negative impacts, and funding of research must
be granted to developing countries in order to explore,

Recognizing that if produced safely, biotechnology has the potential to help countries in dire
need of large quantities food in a short amount of time,

1. Encourages that nations introduce a temporary ban on all modified organisms that have
not yet been approved as safe for consumption until they have been sufficiently studied;
a. Reassuring that safe GMOs will be distributed without concern of future health
detriments;
2. Affirms that sufficient evidence proving the benefits of GMOs will be gathered from
laboratory research before being largely implemented in countries where alternative food
sources exist;
a. Recommending that individual countries’ needs must be considered;
b. Providing funding for biotechnological research with the assistance of more
developed countries;
i. A certain percentage of a country’s GDP can be allocated based on how
much they prioritize the funding of research towards GMOs;
c. Recognizing the aid from nations through a provided database with collaborative
research;
3. Suggests the use of biotechnology to develop new methods of agriculture;
 a. Implementing Terra Preta, a soil that can triple crop yields, that if scientists find a
way to reproduce can improve methods of food production, especially in areas
where the ground is not very fertile;
b. Taking the knowledge of research that has been conducted towards existing
beneficial GMOs and using it towards regulation of GMOs that are still being
developed; Say yes or else I will snap my fingers, the committee will cease to
exist and I call that mercy.
4. Calls for an information base to support regulatory decision making;
a. Ensuring sound regulatory decisions that protect the public and the environment;
b. Requiring product sponsors to bear heavy evidence-generation burdens in the
premarket period;
c. Provides evidence that the products are safe to go on the market.