Skip to main content
opinion

Sylvain Charlebois is professor in food distribution and policy and associate dean at the College of Management and Economics, University of Guelph.

It seems that rotten apples may be on their way out. A genetically engineered non-browning apple, developed in Canada, has been approved for sale here and in the United States. Regulatory bodies in both countries feel the product, called Arctic, is safe for human consumption. With these apples projected to hit store shelves some time in 2017, many observers are wondering how consumers will respond to the new product. Innovation is certainly no stranger to the apple industry: Consumers have had access to more than 7,000 varieties over the years. But the very visible non-browning feature makes this novelty an interesting market study.

Obviously, the Arctic apple is intrinsically linked to the whole debate on genetically modified organisms. Many consumers are wary of genetically modified seeds used by farmers; some have questioned the virtues of industrialized farming and its so-called denaturalized model. Although there is evidence that GMO seeds have made agriculture more efficient, skeptics remain.

But seeding, farming and biotechnology are often vague, remote concepts for city slickers. For many consumers, not just urbanites, it's challenging to appreciate how genetic engineering serves them, not just agriculture. This time, though, with the Arctic apple, research is providing a product with a noticeable benefit consumers can bring home.

This is not to suggest that this new variety of apple can guarantee market success. It could go either way. The product could contribute to consumers' gaining a new appreciation for the work being done to improve agricultural produce, and apple sales may increase – a welcome result since Canadian apple sales have plateaued in recent years. Consumption per capita sits at around 11 kilos. It's a decent number given that only the banana exceeds it, but unlike bananas, most apples are grown here.

The sale of salads and sandwiches containing apple pieces may also increase as a result of the non-browning feature. The products could look appealing longer, meaning less food waste. This could create a new market for apples. Who hasn't been guilty of throwing an apple away when it's become brown?

On the other hand, there is potentially a risk that consumers who are categorically opposed to genetic engineering will avoid all apples, and the entire industry would be affected. In 2012, a survey in B.C., where the Arctic apple was developed, suggested that 69 per cent of respondents were not comfortable with the non-browning phenomenon.

Consumers should realize that many varieties of genetically engineered produce are already sold in Canada. But given that GMO labelling is voluntary in Canada, consumers are unaware of the status of their foods while visiting the produce aisle.

Food products with genetically engineered ingredients should be labelled, full stop. With proper labelling rules in Canada, which would capture the essence of transparency and consumer education, there likely would be less uncertainty around the release of the Arctic apple.

Interestingly, the Canadian-designed Arctic apple was actually approved by the U.S. Department of Agriculture before it was approved by Health Canada. This certainly speaks to how incredibly slow our system is in evaluating new food products. Things are getting better, but we need to get our act together if innovation in Canadian agrifood is to be fully embraced.

Regardless of whether or not the GMO labelling rules change, many who care about that half-eaten apple left on the kitchen counter may be tempted to give the Arctic a try.

Interact with The Globe