Perceptions of genome editing in farm animals by livestock stakeholders

Abstract. Since the development of the Crispr-Cas9 system, genome editing (GE) tools have gained a major place in biological research and the prospects for applications are numerous: in medicine for the treatment of many diseases, medical diagnosis or eradication of disease vectors, in bioindustry (biofuels) or in agriculture. The application of GE in agriculture is nevertheless controversial. The objective of this study was to better understand the positions of the actors of the livestock sector with respect to the use of GE techniques. A qualitative survey by 48 semi-directive interviews was conducted with different actors of the livestock sector (ruminants, pigs, poultry and aquaculture). The analysis of the surveys quickly revealed that knowledge of the subject is still limited to a very narrow sphere (mainly research and breeding sectors), who are familiar with the subject (specialists). The controversy is built around uncertainties. They are linked to the technology, its impacts on the environment and/or biodiversity, on the animal and its socio-political impact. The uncertainties are linked to the major cross-cutting issues raised almost systematically by the respondents, namely: (1) the type of agricultural model in which GE tools is used; (2) impacts of their use, particularly their irreversible nature; (3) ethical issues linked to living organisms, man’s right to modify nature and ownership of living organisms. It allowed to establish a typology of stakeholders in five categories (opponent, sceptical, cautious, enthusiastic, convinced) and to characterize the main arguments associated with the position of the different stakeholders. Beyond the controversy over GE, the question of the farming system in which these techniques are used is a central issue for many stakeholders. This is often equated with highly intensive and unsustainable systems. The question of their use in more agro-ecological and sustainable systems remains highly debated.