The document discusses biotechnology and its use by governments to improve citizen health and agriculture. It describes the National Committee on Biosafety of the Philippines (NCBP) which regulates genetic modification research and policies. The NCBP was established in the 1990s and strengthened in 2006 to oversee modern biotechnology's safe use and potential environmental and social impacts. It follows strict scientific standards for biosafety oversight.

1. A REPORT BY GROUP 4 OF 8-MITOCHONDRION

2. Biotechnology is the use of living systems
and organisms to develop or make useful
products, or “any technological application
uses biological system, living organisms or
derivatives thereof, to make or modify
products of processes for specific use.

4. Biotechnology and government is
the use of biology with technology
for the use of government for the
good of its citizens. It can be used
to improve their health, for
agriculture and many more.

6. NCBP stands for the National Committee on
Biosafety of the Philippines, the country’s lead
regulatory agency tasked with the formulation
and implementation of biosafety policies and the
monitoring of research activities and
experiments being conducted on LMOs.

7. In the 1990s, when new methods of genetic
manipulation in plants, microorganisms and
animals were continuously being developed, the
Philippine government saw the need for the
establishment of a body that would aid the
country in harnessing the benefits of
biotechnology while at the same ensuring its
safe and responsible application.

8. On March 2006, the function and scope of the
Committee was further broadened and
strengthened through President Gloria
Macapagal-Arroyo’s issuance of Executive
Order No. 514 which decreed the establishment
and implementation of a National Biosafety
Framework. This was initiated for the following
reasons:

9. a. Rapid expansion of the use of
modern biotechnology;
b. Growing concern over modern
biotechnology’s potential impacts
on the environment, human health
as well as on social and cultural
well-being;

10. c. Promote the safe and responsible
use of modern biotechnology and its
products as one of the several
means to achieve and sustain food
security, equitable access to health
services, sustainable and safe
environment and industry
development;

11. d. Enhance the existing biosafety
framework to better respond to the
challenges presented by further
advances in modern biotechnology
and to comply with the administrative
requirements of the Cartagena
Protocol on Biosafety.

12. The countries biosafety regulatory
system follows strict scientific
standards and has become a model for
member-countries of the ASEAN
seeking to become producers of
agricultural biotechnology crops.

13. Biosafety policy functions
Accountability functions
Scientific functions
Capacity building functions

14. The Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety (CBP)
is an international agreement on biosafety,
as a supplement to the Convention on
Biological Diversity. The Biosafety Protocol
seeks to protect biological diversity from the
potential risks posed by genetically modified
organisms resulting from modern
biotechnology.

15. The International Rice Research Institute (IRRI) is an
international independent research and training
organization with headquarters in Los Baños, Laguna
in the Philippines and offices in sixteen countries. The
non-governmental organization (NGO) was
established in 1960 to develop new rice varieties and
rice crop management techniques with finding
sustainable ways to improve the well-being of poor rice
farmers and consumers as well as the environment in
mind.

16. The Philippine Council for Agriculture, Aquatic, and Natural
Resources Research and Development (PCAARRD) is a
council of the Department of Science and Technology of the
Philippines government.
The council aims to help national research and development
efforts in agriculture, forestry, and natural resources of the
Philippines. It does so by assisting with planning strategies,
formulating policies, and programs for development. It is the
body responsible nationally for programming and allocating
government and external funds for R&D, and monitors and
evaluates these programs for effectiveness.

17. The Food and Drug Administration of the or
FDA, formerly the Bureau of Food and Drugs or
BFAD) was created under the Department of
Health to license, monitor, and regulate the flow
of food, drugs, cosmetics, medical devices, and
household hazardous waste in the Philippines.

18. Governments have taken different approaches to assess and
manage the risks associated with the use of genetic engineering
technology and the development and release of genetically modified
organisms (GMO), including genetically modified crops and
genetically modified fish. There are differences in the regulation of
GMOs between countries, with some of the most marked
differences occurring between the USA and Europe. Regulation
varies in a given country depending on the intended use of the
products of the genetic engineering. For example, a crop not
intended for food use is generally not reviewed by authorities
responsible for food safety.

19. There is broad scientific consensus that food on the
market derived from GM crops poses no greater risk
than conventional food. There is no evidence to
support the idea that the consumption of approved
GM food has a detrimental effect on human health.
Some scientists and advocacy groups, such as
Greenpeace and World Wildlife Fund, have however
called for additional and more rigorous testing for
GM food.

22. India and China are the two largest producers of genetically
modified products in Asia. India currently only grows GM cotton,
while China produces GM varieties of cotton, poplar, petunia,
tomato, papaya and sweet pepper. Cost of enforcement of
regulations in India are generally higher, possibly due to the greater
influence farmers and small seed firms have on policy makers,
while the enforcement of regulations was more effective in China.
Other Asian countries that grew GM crops in 2011 were Pakistan,
the Philippines and Myanmar. Japan requires labeling so
consumers can exercise choice between foods that have
genetically modified, conventional or organic origins.