A conceptual framework was developed by a working group of the Scientific Committee of the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) to guide risk assessors and risk managers on when and how to integrate ecological recovery and resilience assessments into environmental risk assessments (ERA). In this commentary we advocate that a systems approach is required to integrate the diversity of ecosystem services (ES) providing units, environmental factors, scales, and stressor-related responses necessary to address the context dependency of recovery and resilience in agricultural landscapes. A future challenge in the resilience assessment remains to identify the relevant bundles of ecosystem services provided by different types of agroecosystem that need to be assessed in concert. Integr Environ Assess Manag 2018;14:586-591. © 2018 The Authors. Integrated Environmental Assessment and Management published by Wiley Periodicals, Inc. on behalf of Society of Environmental Toxicology & Chemistry (SETAC).

Classical and augmentative biological control of insect pests and weeds has enjoyed a long history of successes. However, biocontrol practices have not been as universally accepted or optimally utilised as they could be. An International Organisation for Biological Control (IOBC) initiative brought together practitioners and researchers from widely diverse fields to identify the main limitations to biocontrol uptake and to recommend means of mitigation. Limitations to uptake included: risk averse and unwieldy regulatory processes; increasingly bureaucratic barriers to access to biocontrol agents; insufficient engagement and communication with the public, stakeholders, growers and politicians of the considerable economic benefits of biocontrol; and fragmentation of biocontrol sub-disciplines. In this contribution we summarise a range of recommendations for the future that emphasise the need for improved communication of economic, environmental and social successes and benefits of biological control for insect pests, weeds and plant diseases, targeting political, regulatory, grower/land manager and other stakeholder interests. Political initiatives in some countries which augur well for biocontrol in the future are discussed.

A concern with Bt-transgenic insect-resistant plants is their potential to harm non-target organisms. Early studies reported that Cry1Ab-producing Bt maize and purified Cry1Ab harmed larvae of the green lacewing, Chrysoperla carnea. Although these effects could not be confirmed in subsequent studies, some authors still refer to them as evidence that Bt maize harms beneficial species. We provide a comprehensive review of the studies evaluating the effects of Bt (Cry1Ab) maize on C. carnea. The evidence indicates that this important predator is not affected by Bt maize or by the produced Cry1Ab protein. We discuss how conceptual models can assist environmental risk assessments, and we emphasize the importance of robust and reproducible studies.

It is commonly held that confined field trials (CFTs) used to evaluate the potential adverse environmental impacts of a genetically engineered (GE) plant should be conducted in each country where cultivation is intended, even when relevant and potentially sufficient data are already available from studies conducted elsewhere. The acceptance of data generated in CFTs "out of country" can only be realized in practice if the agro-climatic zone where a CFT is conducted is demonstrably representative of the agro-climatic zones in those geographies to which the data will be transported. In an attempt to elaborate this idea, a multi-disciplinary Working Group of scientists collaborated to develop a conceptual framework and associated process that can be used by the regulated and regulatory communities to support transportability of CFT data for environmental risk assessment (ERA). As proposed here, application of the conceptual framework provides a scientifically defensible process for evaluating if existing CFT data from remote sites are relevant and/or sufficient for local ERAs. Additionally, it promotes a strategic approach to identifying CFT site locations so that field data will be transportable from one regulatory jurisdiction to another. Application of the framework and process should be particularly beneficial to public sector product developers and small enterprises that develop innovative GE events but cannot afford to replicate redundant CFTs, and to regulatory authorities seeking to improve the deployment of limited institutional resources.

Worldwide, plants obtained through genetic modification are subject to a risk analysis and regulatory approval before they can enter the market. An area of concern addressed in environmental risk assessments is the potential of genetically modified (GM) plants to adversely affect non-target arthropods and the valued ecosystem services they provide. Environmental risk assessments are conducted case-by-case for each GM plant taking into account the plant species, its trait(s), the receiving environments into which the GM plant is to be released and its intended uses, and the combination of these characteristics. To facilitate the non-target risk assessment of GM plants, information on arthropods found in relevant agro-ecosystems in Europe has been compiled in a publicly available database of bio-ecological information during a project commissioned by the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA). Using different hypothetical GM maize case studies, we demonstrate how the information contained in the database can assist in identifying valued species that may be at risk and in selecting suitable species for laboratory testing, higher-tier studies, as well as post-market environmental monitoring.

Arthropods form a major part of the biodiversity in agricultural landscapes. Many species are valued because they provide ecosystem services, including biological control, pollination and decomposition, or because they are of conservation interest. Some arthropods reduce crop yield and quality, and conventional chemical pesticides, biological control agents and genetically engineered (GE) crops are used to control them. A common concern addressed in the ecological risk assessment (ERA) that precedes regulatory approval of these pest control methods is their potential to adversely affect valued non-target arthropods (NTAs). A key concept of ERA is early-tier testing using worst-case exposure conditions in the laboratory and surrogate test species that are most likely to reveal an adverse effect. If no adverse effects are observed in those species at high exposures, confidence of negligible ecological risk from the use of the pest control method is increased. From experience with chemical pesticides and biological control agents, an approach is proposed for selecting test species for early-tier ERA of GE arthropod-resistant crops. Surrogate species should be selected that most closely meet three criteria: (i) Potential sensitivity: species should be the most likely to be sensitive to the arthropod-active compound based on the known spectrum of activity of the active ingredient, its mode of action, and the phylogenetic relatedness of the test and target species; (ii) Relevance: species should be representative of valued taxa or functional groups that are most likely to be exposed to the arthropod-active compound in the field; and (iii) Availability and reliability: suitable life-stages of the test species must be obtainable in sufficient quantity and quality, and validated test protocols must be available that allow consistent detection of adverse effects on ecologically relevant parameters. Our proposed approach ensures that the most suitable species are selected for testing and that the resulting data provide the most rigorous test of the risk hypothesis of no adverse effect in order to increase the quality and efficiency of ERAs for cultivation of GE crops. (C) 2012 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

European risk managers currently face substantial difficulty in evaluating the risks of genetically modified (Gm) crops for biodiversity. This difficulty is not primarily due to a lack of scientific data (the data are abundant) but rather to a lack of clear criteria for determining what represents environmental harm. Establishing criteria that define harm is not a scientific process but a process of analysing and implementing policy requirements, and policy-makers and regulatory authorities need to define what is to be regarded harmful based on existing legislation. This process is a necessary pre-condition for the environmental risk assessment of GM crops. The present paper proposes a systematic approach on how harm can be explicitly and operationally defined for decision-making. Most legal frameworks require the protection of the environment or more specifically of biodiversity from harm. It follows that the first step in defining harm should be the characterisation of protection goals; protection goals are those valued environmental resources that should not be harmed by GM crop cultivation or by any other agricultural practice. In a second step, one must derive scientifically measurable entities (so-called assessment endpoints) on the basis of the protection goals. Such endpoints are required for regulatory decision-making because they specify what deserves protection. They furthermore allow quantifiable predictions of adverse changes during environmental risk assessment. Definitions of harm also require decisions on which environmental changes should be regarded as relevant and thus represent unacceptable harm. Using a case study comparing different effects of various pest management practices, the current paper proposes an approach that differentiates between intended effects that are acceptable and harmful unintended effects. By making explicit the assumptions underlying policy choices, the ecological criteria proposed here may result in a better and more transparent evaluation of the probability of harm to biodiversity due to the cultivation of GM crops. The paper can help risk managers improve decision-making by providing methods for deriving operational decision-making criteria from policy objectives. (C) 2011 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

In their recent study, Hilbeck et al. (2012) report that Cry1Ab causes lethal effects on larvae of the ladybird beetle Adalia bipunctata when fed directly to the predator. Such toxic effects were not previously observed in a direct feeding study conducted by us (Álvarez-Alfageme et al. 2011). Because Hilbeck et al. (2012) claim that our study design did not allow us to detect any adverse effects we provide arguments for the value and relevance of our study in this commentary. Furthermore we discuss two additional published studies that have not revealed any direct effects of Cry1Ab on larvae of A. bipunctata and are not mentioned by Hilbeck et al. (2012). One of the studies was conducted in our laboratory under more realistic exposure conditions (Álvarez-Alfageme et al. 2011). Feeding A. bipunctata larvae with spider mites reared on Bt maize did not reveal any adverse effects on lethal and sublethal parameters of the predator. This was despite the fact that the larvae had ingested high amounts of biologically-active Cry1Ab protein. Thus, we do not see verified evidence that A. bipunctata larvae are sensitive to Cry1Ab at realistic worst-case exposure concentrations. This, together with the fact that A. bipunctata will be little exposed to Cry1Ab under field conditions, allows us to conclude that the risk of Bt maize to this predator is negligible. Support for this comes from the results of many Bt maize field studies that have not revealed evidence for direct Cry1Ab-effects on non-Lepidoptera species.

Outcrosses from genetically modified (GM) to conventional crops by pollen-mediated gene flow (PMGF) are a concern when growing GM crops close to non-GM fields. This also applies to the experimental releases of GM plants in field trials. Therefore, biosafety measures such as isolation distances and surveying of PMGF are required by the regulatory authorities in Switzerland. For two and three years, respectively, we monitored crop-to-crop PMGF from GM wheat field trials in two locations in Switzerland. The pollen donors were two GM spring wheat lines with enhanced fungal resistance and a herbicide tolerance as a selection marker. Seeds from the experimental plots were sampled to test the detection method for outcrosses. Two outcrosses were found adjacent to a transgenic plot within the experimental area. For the survey of PMGF, pollen receptor plots of the conventional wheat variety Frisal used for transformation were planted in the border crop and around the experimental field up to a distance of 200 m. Although the environmental conditions were favorable and the donor and receptor plots flowered at the same time, only three outcrosses were found in approximately 185,000 tested seedlings from seeds collected outside the experimental area. All three hybrids were found in the border crop surrounding the experimental area, but none outside the field. We conclude that a pollen barrier (border crop) and an additional isolation distance of 5 m is a sufficient measure to reduce PMGF from a GM wheat field trial to cleistogamous varieties in commercial fields below a level that can be detected.

Early-tier studies are the initial step in the environmental risk assessment of genetically engineered plants on nontarget arthropods. They are conducted in the laboratory where surrogate species are exposed to higher concentrations of the arthropod-active compound than those expected to occur in the field. Thus, early-tier tests provide robust data and allow to make general conclusions about the susceptibility of the surrogate to the test substance. We have developed an early-tier test for assessing the toxicity of orally-active insecticidal compounds to larvae of the ladybird beetle Coccinella septempunctata L. (Coleoptera: Coccinellidae). Using potassium arsenate and the protease inhibitor E-64 as model compounds, we validated the bioassay set-up for C. septempunctata. Sucrose solution containing the test compound was offered to larvae for 24 h on the first day of each of its four larval instars. Subsequently, larvae were fed ad libitum with Ephestia kuehniella (Zeller) (Lepidoptera: Pyralidae) eggs. Both compounds negatively affected C. septempunctata larval survival and development, and adult weight, indicating that the bioassay setup was able to detect dietary effects of insecticidal substances on the ladybird. Power analyses revealed that sample sizes of 20 or 45 per treatment are sufficient to detect 50 or 20% differences between the control and treatment groups, respectively, for the various measurement endpoints.

Le mais Bt est un moyen de lutte specifique et efficace contre certains ravageurs. Lorsque le mais Bt remplace des insecticides chimiques a large spectre d�action, les avantages ecologiques sont evidents, car cela permet par exemple de menager des organismes auxiliaires. Des produits de haute qualite peuvent ainsi etre cultives en peu de temps et a bon marche. Le developpement de resistances et l�attaque d�eventuels ravageurs secondaires risquent de compromettre l�utilisation durable du mais Bt; cela exige la prise de mesures adequates (refuges, promotion des ennemis naturels) ainsi qu�un suivi. Malgre le cout eleve des semences et l�excedent de depenses administratives, les producteurs de mais Bt pourraient augmenter leurs revenus dans les regions tres menacees par les ravageurs. Mais face a l�interdiction de cultiver du mais Bt dans de nombreux pays europeens, les productrices et producteurs n�ont pas tous la possibilite de beneficier de ce potentiel economique. Dans le contexte de la production integree, le mais Bt pourrait etre combine avec d�autres mesures.

Challenges in the environmental monitoring of genetically modified plants According to genetic engineering legislation in Switzerland, the cultivation of genetically modified plants (GMPs) must be accompanied by environmental monitoring. This environmental monitoring is intended to identify any negative effects on the environment as early as possible so that necessary remedial measures can be taken. Accordingly, the authorities must be in a position to recognise changes in the environment and classify them as environmental harm. In our opinion, however, environmental monitoring is only partially suitable for reducing uncertainties which might still exist after the risk assessment of GMPs. From a scientific point of view, there are four difficulties with such decisions. The first three difficulties concern methodological limitations in scientific data collection. The fourth difficulty stems from the controversial assessment of the environmental effects of GMPs. Thus, it is nowadays unclear just which environmental changes are effectively to be evaluated as constituting harm. In this article, we analyse the four challenges and suggest possible strategies for countering them. Any remaining uncertainties should ideally be investigated during risk assessment before approval is granted. Regulatory authorities should recognise the limitations of environmental-monitoring programs for decision-making during cultivation of GMPs.

Although several alternative pest management strategies are available, crop protection in general and apple crop protection in particular often relies on pesticides. This is largely because multiple environmental and economic aspects or attributes must be simultaneously considered by crop managers, which makes it difficult for them to determine whether one strategy is more sustainable than another. In our study, we investigated the elements that must be considered to obtain a clear and useful assessment of sustainability. We present a system-description tool created especially for life cycle assessment (assessment of energy use and ecotoxicity), environmental 2 risk assessment, and full-cost calculations. Using the various results from these assessments as qualitative attributes, we designed a multi-attribute tool that allows us to integrate sustainability attributes over five levels into an overall sustainability rating. To demonstrate the transparency of this method and how it enables decision makers to deal with complexity, we use the method to assess different crop protection systems used in apple production. Although, the multi-attribute decision method provided a reasonable overall assessment of the sustainability of different protection systems, the assessment could be substantially influenced by the selection of rating scales and decision rules. Therefore, the rating scales and decision rules should be carefully defined and discussed among the research teams. In our case, experts have participated from five European countries. Keywords: multi-attributive decision making, apple orchard, crop protection strategy, sustainable development, life cycle assessment (LCA), SYNOPS, full-cost calculation.