Exploring the potential and challenges of gene editing technology in traditional agriculture
Imagine a future where cows no longer need painful dehorning, pigs are immune to devastating viruses, and chickens can resist avian flu. This isn't science fiction—it's the potential promised by CRISPR-Cas9, a revolutionary gene-editing technology that has made precise genetic modifications in livestock increasingly feasible 1 5 .
In the picturesque pastures of Bavaria, where small-scale farmers have worked the land for generations, this promising technology faces an uncertain future.
The emergence of CRISPR has for the first time rendered large-scale genetic modification of livestock such as cows, pigs, and chickens possible 1 . Unlike prior techniques that were largely effective on plants and smaller mammals, CRISPR-Cas9 presents a technology that might allow scientists and breeders to engage in the genetic modification of agricultural livestock animals with unprecedented precision and at lower cost 5 .
In Bavaria, a unique transdisciplinary research consortium called "FORTiGe" set out to explore this very question. Their mission was to test both the technical and social feasibility of using CRISPR-Cas9 in Bavarian livestock agriculture, focusing specifically on applications that would improve animal health rather than simply increase yields 1 .
CRISPR functions like a precision search-and-replace tool for DNA, allowing targeted changes to specific genes with unprecedented accuracy.
Bavarian research focuses on applications that improve animal health and welfare, not just productivity increases.
Gene editing, particularly using the CRISPR-Cas9 system, functions like a precision search-and-replace tool for DNA. Derived from a natural defense system in bacteria, this technology allows scientists to make targeted changes to specific genes with unprecedented accuracy 6 .
Creating immunity to common livestock diseases like colienterotoxaemia in pigs or avian leucosis in chickens.
Eliminating painful procedures like dehorning through genetic modifications for hornless cattle.
| Animal | Trait | Potential Benefit |
|---|---|---|
| Cattle | Hornlessness | Eliminates painful dehorning procedures |
| Pigs | Immunity to colienterotoxaemia | Reduces mortality from bacterial infections |
| Pigs | Resistance to PRRS virus | Prevents respiratory and reproductive disease |
| Chickens | Resistance to avian leucosis | Decreases viral transmission in flocks |
| Cattle | Lower methane emissions | Reduces environmental impact |
What makes CRISPR particularly revolutionary is that prior techniques for genetically modifying higher organisms were either much more costly or less precise, requiring significant investment to achieve desired outcomes, particularly in mammals 5 .
Bavaria presents a fascinating case study for this technology. It's one of the few regions in Germany where relatively many small-scale farmers still persist—30% of all German farms are located in Bavaria, with more than half being part-time enterprises where farmers have additional income sources 5 .
"Only large farms with intensified plant and animal farming can make a profit today. But these kinds of structures do not comply with the expectations many consumers and society have towards farming."
Perhaps surprisingly, none of the farmers showed interest in using CRISPR to increase yields—for instance, by increasing the muscle mass of pigs for meat production or boosting milk production in cows 5 . They viewed contemporary livestock as already at the brink of what their bodies can handle and voiced concerns that even traditional breeding techniques had pushed animals too far for the sake of human consumption. Instead, they were interested in applications that would genuinely improve animal health and welfare.
The FORTiGe research consortium (2018-2021) brought together an unusual alliance: life scientists, local breeding associations, legal scholars, and social scientists from Science & Technology Studies (STS) 1 . This diverse collaboration aimed to promote Responsible Research and Innovation (RRI) for gene editing technologies, with a specific focus on applications that would benefit small- to medium-scale Bavarian livestock farmers.
Establishment of the FORTiGe consortium with transdisciplinary membership including scientists, breeding associations, and social scientists.
Co-development of editing targets with local breeding associations to meet the situated needs of Bavarian farmers.
Strategic decision to focus exclusively on disease resistance applications to counter perceptions of corporate-driven yield increases.
Positive research results but identification of implementation barriers due to policy conflicts.
| Stakeholder Group | Primary Concerns | Potential Benefits Seen |
|---|---|---|
| Small-scale Farmers | Economic survival, animal welfare, public perception | Improved animal health, reduced disease losses |
| Breeding Associations | Practical applicability, breed improvement | Disease resistance, maintaining breed standards |
| Life Scientists | Technical feasibility, research advancement | Scientific discovery, practical applications |
| Social Scientists | Ethical implications, social acceptance | Responsible innovation, public engagement |
| Consumers | Food safety, naturalness, transparency | Higher welfare standards, sustainable production |
Despite generating positive research outcomes, the project uncovered a significant paradox: even successful applications of gene editing were unlikely to be implemented in Bavarian livestock agriculture 1 . This situation can be understood as a tension between agendas in the science and technology policy field and in the agricultural policy field in Bavaria.
This conflict creates what researchers describe as a "right vs. right" dilemma 1 . Farmers may personally value both technological innovation and sustainable practices, but their institutional environment—with its market mechanisms, regulations, and standards—often makes focusing on mere survival more feasible than adopting innovative technologies like gene editing, regardless of their potential benefits.
The challenges faced by the FORTiGe project raise critical questions about Responsible Research and Innovation (RRI), an approach that aims to anticipate and assess potential implications and societal expectations regarding research and innovation .
Describing and analysing potential impacts of research and innovation
Opening up visions for broader deliberation with diverse stakeholders
Thinking about purposes, motivations, and assumptions behind innovation
Using these processes to influence direction and trajectory of innovation
| RRI Dimension | Key Questions | Application to Livestock Gene Editing |
|---|---|---|
| Anticipation | What might happen? What are potential impacts? | Assessing effects on small farmers, animal welfare, ecosystems |
| Inclusion | Who is affected? Who should be involved? | Engaging farmers, consumers, breeders, environmental groups |
| Reflexivity | What assumptions, values shape the technology? | Examining motivations behind editing targets, beneficiaries |
| Responsiveness | How to adapt based on reflection? | Adjusting research priorities, governance based on stakeholder input |
| Transparency | How open is the process? | Clear communication about methods, purposes, funders |
The challenges observed in Bavaria reflect broader global conversations about genome editing governance. In March 2018, approximately 160 participants from 35 countries gathered in Paris to launch ARRIGE (Association for Responsible Research and Innovation in Genome Editing), a nonprofit initiative aimed at promoting global governance of genome editing 6 .
This international perspective highlights that the tensions observed in Bavaria are not unique but reflect broader societal questions about how to responsibly develop and deploy powerful new technologies. As genome editing continues to advance rapidly, these governance discussions become increasingly urgent.
The story of gene editing in Bavarian livestock agriculture reveals a complex interplay between technological potential and societal context. CRISPR-Cas9 offers remarkable possibilities for addressing genuine challenges in livestock farming, particularly regarding animal health—yet its implementation remains uncertain not primarily for technical reasons, but due to policy conflicts, economic constraints, and social considerations.
The Bavarian case demonstrates that the future of gene editing in agriculture will depend not only on scientific advancement but on creating inclusive governance frameworks that address the needs and concerns of all stakeholders, particularly the farmers who would work with these technologies daily. It highlights the importance of focusing not just on responsible research but on responsible innovation—considering how technologies move from lab to market, and who benefits from them.
As one of the first studies worldwide to interrogate farmers' perspectives on gene editing in livestock, the FORTiGe project provides crucial insights that should inform both policy and innovation pathways 5 . The question remains whether gene editing will become a doomed technology in this context, or whether new governance approaches can emerge that reconcile technological innovation with the situated needs of farmers, animals, and society.
The journey of CRISPR from laboratory tool to agricultural application continues to unfold, shaped not only by scientific possibilities but by the values, priorities, and power dynamics that determine which technologies flourish and which fail to take root in our fields and farms.