A non-genetically modified technique could provide the same project gains as the use of genetically modified grasses in New Zealand and without the risk of triggering consumer resistance, according to an investigation by the Sustainability Council of New Zealand.
The council has released a report, based on documents obtained through the Official Information Act, which has assessed the economic case for pursuing GM pasture grasses.
Marker assisted selection (MAS) could deliver equal economic benefits without the risk of triggering the type of consumer resistance that GM food has provoked, the council said.
"Tens of millions" of taxpayer dollars have been staked on three groups researching GM grasses, with about $20 million going to the Pastoral Genomics consortium.
Pastoral Genomics is funded by the Ministry of Science and Innovation, DairyNZ, Fonterra, Beef and Lamb New Zealand, DEEResearch and AgResearch.
While the message from GM proponents had been that New Zealand must pursue GM or be left behind, the documents showed Pastoral Genomics' GM grasses had no greater ability to raise pasture productivity than non-GM means of accessing new gene science, the council said.
If labelling was required for any level of GM content, it could result in lost earnings worth "hundreds of millions" a year or more.
Pastoral Genomics consortium manager Dr Zac Hanley could not be contacted for comment.