Viet Nam explores legal framework for gene editing in agriculture

A leap from conventional breeding to precision agriculture

At the Forum “Gene Editing in Agriculture - A Strategic Technology Linked to Legal Frameworks,” Dr. Nguyen Duy Phuong, from the Institute of Agricultural Genetics, delivered a comprehensive presentation on the development, applications, and policy directions of gene editing technology. He stressed that gene editing represents a transformative scientific breakthrough that can reshape plant breeding and food production, provided that Viet Nam swiftly completes its regulatory framework.

According to Dr. Phuong, gene editing technology has evolved since the 1980s but only gained global momentum after the introduction of CRISPR-Cas9 in 2013, which enables scientists to make precise, targeted modifications to DNA sequences. Data from PubMed indicate an exponential rise in global publications related to gene editing, particularly in agriculture. Research has concentrated on major crops such as soybean, maize, rice, canola, grape, and sorghum, focusing on traits like disease resistance, stress tolerance, fruit quality and color, extended shelf life, and improved plant morphology.

Traditional breeding typically requires 12–14 years to produce a new variety, and hybrid breeding takes 8–10 years, while gene editing can shorten the process to just 2–5 years. Dr. Phuong noted that gene editing not only enhances precision and efficiency but also maintains the original characteristics of plant varieties, offering a more stable and cost-effective path to genetic improvement.

In his report, Dr. Phuong clarified the mechanism and classification of gene editing systems based on Site Directed Nuclease (SDN) technologies, which include three main categories: SDN-1, SDN-2, and SDN-3.

SDN-1 (a precise mutation without foreign DNA insertion or new protein expression) modifies existing DNA sequences through natural cellular repair mechanisms, creating changes equivalent to spontaneous mutations in traditional breeding. SDN-2 uses a short DNA template to correct specific base pairs in the target gene, also without introducing new proteins. In contrast, SDN-3 involves inserting foreign DNA that encodes new proteins and traits, making it comparable to transgenic technology, which produces Genetically Modified Organisms (GMOs).

“The essential difference,” Dr. Phuong explained, “is that transgenic technology introduces foreign genetic material, while gene editing modifies the organism’s native DNA without inserting external genes.” Therefore, he emphasized, SDN-1 and SDN-2 products should not be regulated under GMO frameworks.

Essential to update and expand the existing GMO management framework

In Viet Nam, several research institutes have successfully applied gene editing in plant breeding. The Institute of Agricultural Genetics and collaborating units have developed rice varieties such as Bac Thom 7 (heat-tolerant), TBR225 (low cadmium accumulation and bacterial blight resistance), and KD18 (salt-tolerant). Other achievements include soybean lines with reduced indigestible sugars and enhanced drought resistance; papaya resistant to ring spot virus; tobacco resistant to PVY virus; tomato with higher sugar and carotenoid content; and maize with increased kernel rows per ear. Some of these edited crops are ready for pilot production trials.

Despite such progress, Dr. Phuong pointed out several challenges. Vietnam currently lacks a specific legal framework for gene editing, and existing regulations still classify these products together with GMOs, even though their biological nature is distinct. Public understanding remains limited, and policy makers often fail to distinguish gene editing from transgenesis. The diversity of editing tools - CRISPR, TALEN, ZFN - further complicates consistent legal application.

He warned that applying GMO-based biosafety regulations to gene-edited crops, especially SDN-1 and SDN-2, which do not contain foreign DNA, could hinder research and innovation. Many countries, by contrast, have adopted a flexible, science-based approach, treating such products as conventional plants.

To address these issues, Dr. Phuong proposed several key solutions. Vietnam should clearly differentiate between gene-edited products and genetically modified (transgenic) products, and classify gene editing types according to SDN-1, SDN-2, and SDN-3, with defined regulatory boundaries for each.

He recommended a “product-based regulation” approach, focusing on the characteristics of the final product rather than the process used to develop it. Under this approach, SDN-1 and SDN-2 (without new DNA or proteins) would be considered conventional crops, while SDN-3 (with inserted DNA or new proteins) would fall under GMO regulations.

Dr. Phuong also called for amending the definition in Vietnam’s Law on Biodiversity, so that “a genetically modified organism is defined as one whose genetic structure has been altered through transgenic technology,” thereby avoiding confusion with gene-edited organisms that do not contain foreign DNA. He emphasized that Viet Nam does not need to create an entirely new regulatory system but rather update and expand the existing GMO management framework to accommodate gene editing technologies.

Dr. Phuong concluded that gene editing is a strategic direction for Vietnam’s agricultural science. The Party and Government have identified it as a priority technology of national importance. With adequate human resources, technical capacity, and research infrastructure, Vietnam has the foundation to advance rapidly in this field.

“Gene editing is the technology of our era,” Dr. Phuong affirmed. “While the world moves swiftly in research, application, and commercialization, Vietnam must not fall behind. To move forward, we need a legal framework that reflects the true nature of this technology.”

His remarks at the forum underscored an important scientific recommendation, a call to develop a distinct regulatory approach for gene-edited crops, which remains a policy proposal under consideration rather than an official government decision.