Genetically modified crops with an increased vitamin and/or mineral content have large potential to improve public health, but their availability for consumers is still hampered by negative public opinion. Research from Ghent University, recently published in Nature Biotechnology, has demonstrated that these crops have a promising market potential.

Over the last few years, various GM crops with health benefits have been developed in which genes, mostly originating from other organisms, have been added. Notable examples include rice enriched with pro-vitamin A (also known as “Golden Rice”) and folate-enriched rice, developed at Ghent University.

Fifteen years after the development of Golden Rice, which was the first GMO with health benefits, the developers of such transgenic biofortified crops have little reason to celebrate. To date, none of these GMOs are approved for cultivation, unlike GMOs with agronomic traits. Despite this, six major staple crops have been successfully biofortified with one or more vitamins or minerals. A recent study from Ghent University discussed not only the impact of GM crops on human health, but also their market potential.

Market Potential
Research revealed that consumers are willing to pay more for GMOs with health benefits, with premiums ranging from 20-70%. This differs from GMOs with farmer benefits, which are only accepted by consumers when they are offered at a discount.

Especially in regions, such as China and Brazil—which are considered as key target markets for these nutritionally improved crops—where a large part of the population suffers from nutrient deficiencies, the potential market share of these GMOs is high.

Improving Public Health
Several studies show these GMOs have positive impacts on human health. As expected, the enhancement of multiple micronutrients in the same crop by genetic modification, yields the best results. This method generates aggregated health benefits at a relatively low cost, according to researchers.

Tackling Malnutrition
Although GMOs with health benefits are not a panacea for eliminating malnutrition, they offer a complementary and cost-effective alternative when other strategies are less successful or feasible, researchers concluded.