Coexistence is defined by Webster's dictionary as - to exist together (in time or place). In Canada, conventional and organic crops have coexisted for some time. Since 1995 biotech crops have also been grown in Canada. The acres of GE canola, corn and soybean have steadily increased each year to the point where the total acreage of these crops is now 50% or greater biotech varieties (Canola Council of Canada, AgCare1). Conventional and GE agriculture are the dominant production methods for canola, corn and soybean in Canada, with organic filling a niche market.

Coexistence of conventional, GE and organic systems is an economic/market issue and not a health or environmental safety issue. Safety issues are addressed by Health Canada and the Canadian Food Inspection Agency (CFIA) through risk assessments that must be completed before any new crops or inputs can be commercially introduced in Canada. The International Seed Federation also supports the view that coexistence is a non-safety issue. The issue of coexistence has created much debate in jurisdictions such as the EU, as stakeholders struggle to define practical coexistence under recently adopted and restrictive legislation for GE crops and food products.

The Canadian experience to date has been that there are ample markets for crops from all production systems and it is desirable to provide choice for both producers and consumers. In the case of GE crops, market issues arise where some international market places prohibit their entrance, do not specify tolerance thresholds (therefore zero) or where thresholds are set so low (de facto zero) that they are not achievable - and therefore coexistence becomes difficult to attain. These de facto zero thresholds are neither practical nor achievable in jurisdictions such as Canada, the US, or elsewhere, where GE crops are grown, and will create market disruptions, added costs, and trade barriers for products produced from all systems including conventional, GE and organic. Political decisions such as "GE free zones", which are equivalent to a ban of one type of agriculture, are unacceptable. They in fact deny farmers, consumers and the whole food chain the right of choice.

Agriculture and food production systems (e.g. organic) have relied on practical thresholds for many years, either for target markets or quality control. Specifically in Canada, the National Organic Standard provides a 5% labelling threshold for "non-organic" ingredients, which allows for the unintentional presence (or adventitious presence) of GE ingredients, residues of synthetic pesticides and other inputs from conventional agriculture production. The Canadian General Standards Board (CGSB) recently published a National Standard specifically for labelling of GE Foods. This standard also specifies a 5% threshold. Regulators and commodity traders in major markets understand that a 'zero' standard is not achievable and therefore such workable thresholds are necessary.

CropLife Canada and our member companies support the view that conventional, organic and GE process based production systems can coexist. Coexistence of different agricultural systems can play an important role in sustainable agri-food production system in Canada and globally. CropLife Canada also supports and endorses the National Standard established by the CGSB for Voluntary Labelling of GE Foods.

It is CropLife Canada's position that the fundamental requirement to allow the coexistence of production systems is the establishment of practical and workable thresholds. Where health and safety are not a factor, the setting of thresholds should be driven by the practicalities of typical agronomic and production market economics.

• Coexistence is not new - it has occurred for many years with different agronomic systems and product standards functioning together
  
  
• Coexistence is not a safety issue - it is related to economics/markets. Precedent exists in specialized production sectors where members of the value chain take responsibility for meeting any purity standards required to access those markets. Where economic losses occur a potential solution may be product liability insurance.
  
  
• Coexistence must be practical, with all participants in the agri-food chain prepared to cooperate in facilitating co-existence.
  
  
• Coexistence requires realistic thresholds/standards based on Good Agricultural Practices (GAP)
  
  
• Coexistence requires appropriate and crop specific management, handling and verification practices
  
  
• The goal of coexistence is to provide producers with choice in pursuing reasonable market goals.
  
  
• Coexistence requires mutual respect amongst practitioners of different production systems (e.g. one system should not exclude another).