Search

Genetically modified products and living modified organisms

Korea's legislation on the marketing of genetically modified agricultural products (GMAPs), , continues to apply equally to domestic and imported GMAPs. Since 1 January 2008, Korea has implemented the Act on Transboundary Movement of Living Modified Organisms (LMO Act), the law implementing the Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety to the Convention on Biological Diversity. Imports of biotech grains, as well as genetically engineered animals, are regulated under the Food Sanitation Act and the LMO Act, which was last revised in December 2012 and became effective on 12 December 2013, to, inter alia, provide a definition of stacked events ; its Enforcement Decree, the Enforcement Regulations, and the Consolidated Notice were revised in 2014.

Food safety and environmental risk assessments (ERAs) are mandatory on biotechnology crops and LMOs. The authorities indicated that, in accordance with CODEX guidelines and OECD Biosafety Consensus Documents, safety of LMOs for food is evaluated under the principle of substantial equivalence based on scientifically valid and justified data such as comparison of toxicity, allergenicity and the nutrients of the GM food in question and its non-GM counterpart; they consider that the approval procedure is legitimate and does not lead to unnecessary delays. [117] (...) The Rural Development Administration (crop cultivation environment), the National Institute of Ecology overseen by MOE (as from end-2013, replacing the National Institute of Environmental Research) (natural ecosystem), and the National Fisheries Research and Development Institute (marine ecosystem) are responsible for environmental risk assessment (ERA). (...) By March 2016, MAFRA had completed a total of 131 out of 151 applications for review of environmental risks of LMOs; as of April 2016, it was conducting 11 reviews and had completed a total of 6 out of 14 applications for environmental risk assessment on food.

[117] Certain documentation requirements for biotech approvals seemingly go beyond the provisions of the Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety; it appears that data and information requests may lead to delays in the approval of new products and at times lack scientific justification. USTR (2015).

Korea implements the Advance Informed Agreement Procedure as well as labelling requirements for GMOs and LMOs (Section 3.2.9.3).

(…) Following the discovery of continuing leakages of contaminated water in 2013, Korea implemented temporary measures including the extension of the import ban and testing requirements. Some of these measures led to a dispute settlement case in 2015 (Sections 2.5.1 and 3.2.9.2.3). (...)

Genetically modified corn, soybeans, cotton, rape and sugar beet (including sprouts originating from these items), as well as foods suitable for consumption containing these products and notified as such by the MFDS, remain subject to mandatory GMO labelling requirements. GMO foods for which identity preservation documents or government-issued certificates were submitted are exempted from GMO labelling requirements. On the other hand, concerning food from the United States, Korea accepts a notarized self-declaration, instead of requiring full documentation, to certify products that are exempt from biotechnology requirements. Importers or manufacturers must keep records for up to two years to prove that unlabelled foods subject to GMO labelling requirements are GMO free. On 24 April 2014, the MFDS combined the three existing labelling standards, i.e. the Labelling Standards for Recombinant Food, Guidelines for Labelling of Genetically Modified Agricultural Products, and Labelling Standards in the LMO Act (Section 3.2.9.2.1) to provide standards required for the labelling of biotech crops and food, including processed food products containing corn, soybeans, cotton, canola, and sugar beets with 3% or higher GMO content. While several proposals to expand biotech labelling dating back to 2008 and 2013 are still pending in the National Assembly and/or the Prime Minister's Office, the MFDS announced its plan in early 2015 to expand mandatory biotech labelling to include all products with detectable biotech ingredients. Under the 31 December 2015 revision of the Food Sanitation Act and the Functional Health Foods Act, the scope of the GM labelling requirement was expanded to any food products that contain genetically modified DNA or genetically modified proteins on 3 February 2016, effective as from 4 February 2017. Under the current system, biotech labelling is not required for products that contain biotech ingredients beyond the top five ingredients. On the other hand, highly refined food such as sugars and oils will continue to be exempt from the mandatory biotech labelling requirement as genetically modified DNA and genetically modified proteins are removed during the processing procedures.

(...) The 2005 Act on Encouragement of Purchase of Green Products (known as the Law on the Promotion of Environmentally Friendly Products) requires government agencies and state-owned enterprises (SOEs) to purchase environment-friendly products; as of 2015, it applied to 50 (49 in 2012) central government agencies, 438 (244 in 2012) local government bodies, and 405 (380 in 2012) public institutions and SOEs affiliated with central and local government agencies (893 agencies in total). Although the law makes mandatory the purchase of environmentally friendly products, it provides exceptions for quality and availability reasons, as well as emergency procurement needs. (...)

During the review period, the PPS (Public Procurement Service) maintained its 2009 Action Plan for Green Purchasing and its 2010 Purchasing Guidelines for the Promotion of Public Purchase of Green Products; these Guidelines specify the scope of green purchasing public organizations, and ensure the effectiveness of green purchasing. To expand demand for green products, as of 2015, 100 items (50 in 2011) highly demanded by public sector entities, such as office machines, recycled products, LED lamps, hybrid vehicles, high efficiency equipment, and synthetic wood were designated by the PPS as Minimum Environmental Standard products. The PPS provides preferential treatment for companies with green construction works in pre qualification eligibility examination, and it is mandatory for newly constructed government buildings to comply with the Energy Efficiency Grade 1 and Eco-Friendly Design Standard. In 2011 and 2015, the PPS purchased green products accounting for 10.2% and 18.6% of the total value of domestic procurement of goods respectively.

The negative list of banned exports has not changed during the period under review. Export prohibitions, affecting 11 six-digit HS items, protect animal rights (dog furskins and their products), endangered species (whale meat and its products), and preserve natural resources (uncut pieces of natural granite stones).

Sand and gravel-related items are subject to non-automatic licensing to protect natural resources.

(...) VAT remains the main indirect (consumption) tax component, followed by the transportation-energy-environment tax. (...)