Mexican President Andrés Manuel López Obrador has recently put forward a proposal for a ban on genetically modified (GM) corn in the tortilla and masa industry, aiming for implementation by January 2024. Obrador asserts that this move is in favor of the country’s food sovereignty, promoting biodiversity, and safeguarding human health.

For years, Mexico has been moving towards tighter regulation of biotechnology to protect its native corn species. In a recent address, Obrador emphasized the importance of preserving health and native corn varieties. The President’s decree aims to ensure food security and biodiversity by conserving diverse maize varieties, and also seeks to support small-scale farmers and traditional agricultural practices.

The proposed enforcement targets minimally processed corn, particularly for the tortilla and masa industry, but excludes more processed products like oils. Initially, it also included limitations on GM corn for animal feed and industrial use, but a compromise was offered to the United States, excluding these categories. However, this compromise was rejected by the Biden administration.

The United States has expressed concerns over the measure, with Andrew Brandt from the U.S. Grains Council highlighting potential issues for corn production, biosecurity, and trade policy. He warns of economic impacts on farmers due to the proposed ban.

Agribusiness leaders and lobbyists in the U.S. are warning of severe consequences for both Mexican and American farmers. The National Corn Growers Association describes the potential ban as “catastrophic” for U.S. corn producers and urges the U.S. government to intervene.

However, Timothy Wise from the Institute for Agriculture and Trade Policy downplays the impact on U.S. farmers, describing the ban as a precautionary public health measure affecting a small segment of U.S. agriculture.

The U.S. Trade Representative (USTR) has sought technical consultations under the United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement (USMCA) to address concerns about trade disruption. USTR Ambassador Katherine Tai emphasizes the potential negative impacts on agricultural trade and innovation.

Mexico, in turn, has agreed to these consultations and is committed to implementing the policy in a way that minimally affects trade, in line with the USMCA agreement. According to the USMCA’s Sanitary and Phytosanitary (SPS) Measures, Mexico must demonstrate that imported GM corn poses a health or biosecurity risk to enforce the ban, a requirement that the USTR claims Mexico is currently failing to meet.

The USTR has demanded scientific justification for the ban, a response to which Mexico has provided in a document not publicly released. The SPS Measure allows for precautionary measures, even if they differ from another country’s safety regulations.

While proponents of GM products argue for their safety, studies show no international consensus and potential harm to Mexico’s maize diversity.

In the event of no resolution, the USTR may establish an independent panel to investigate and rule on the measure, possibly leading to the removal of the ban and broader discussions on biosecurity and biotechnology in trade agreements.

The National Corn Growers Association and other groups are concerned about the precedent this might set for USMCA and future trade agreements. Canada, while not a corn exporter, has joined the U.S. in expressing similar concerns.

Meanwhile, Indigenous and environmental advocacy groups in Mexico see the ban as a way to support the growth of heirloom corn varieties and bolster local biodiversity and food security.

Since NAFTA’s implementation in 1994, Mexico’s domestic corn industry has struggled against U.S. agricultural subsidies. Indigenous farmers, particularly affected by price fluctuations, could benefit from a revival of traditional farming practices.

Anet Aguilar, from the National Campaign No Country Without Corn, views the ban as essential to preserving cultural traditions and pushing for top-down change.