Advertisement

Economic and Social Considerations in the Adoption of Bt Crops

  • Matin Qaim
  • Carl E. Pray
  • David Zilberman
Part of the Progress in Biological Control book series (PIBC, volume 5)

Abstract

This chapter provides an overview of the economics of Bt crop adoption, with a special emphasis on Bt cotton. On average, the technology reduces insecticide applications and pest-related crop losses. In spite of higher seed prices, farmers realize substantial gains in cotton incomes. In India and China alone, Bt cotton produces annual welfare gains of several hundred million US dollars, with farmers being the main beneficiaries. In the USA, stronger IPR protection leads to larger benefit shares for biotechnology companies, but agricultural producers and consumers profit as well. More preliminary studies for maize, rice, and eggplant suggest that similar results can also be expected for other Bt crops. Furthermore, health benefits and aspects of consumer acceptance are analyzed. Finally, several institutional and regulatory issues are discussed, as these might have important ramifications for technology access, benefit distribution, seed market structures, and biodiversity.

Keywords

Genetically Modify Genetically Modify Crop Genetically Modify Food Genetically Engineer Crop Genetically Modify Seed 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Basu, A.K., and Qaim, M., 2007. On the adoption of genetically modified seeds in developing countries and the optimal types of government intervention. American Journal of Agricultural Economics 89: 784–804.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bates, S.L., Zhao, J.Z., Roush, R.T., and Shelton, A.M., 2005. Insect resistance management in GM crops: Past, present and future. Nature Biotechnology 23: 57–62.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bennett, R., Morse, S., and Ismael, Y., 2003. Bt cotton, pesticides, labour and health: A case study of smallholder farmers in the Makhathini Flats, Republic of South Africa. Outlook on Agriculture 32: 123–128.Google Scholar
  4. Bennett, R., Kambhampati, U., Morse, S., and Ismael, Y., 2006. Farm-level economic performance of genetically modified cotton in Maharashtra, India. Review of Agricultural Economics 28: 59–71.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Brookes, G., and Barfoot, P., 2005. GM Crops: The Global Socioeconomic and Environmental Impact – The First Nine Years. PG Economics Ltd., Dorchester, The Netherlands.Google Scholar
  6. Carpenter, J., Felsot, A., Goode, T., Hammig, M., Onstad, D., and Sankula, S., 2002. Comparative Environmental Impacts of Biotechnology-derived and Traditional Soybean, Corn, and Cotton Crops. Council for Agricultural Science and Technology, Ames, IA, USA.Google Scholar
  7. Curtis, K.R., McCluskey, J.J., and Wahl, T.I., 2004. Consumer acceptance of genetically modified food products in the developing world. AgBioForum 7: 70–75.Google Scholar
  8. de la Campa, R., Hooker, D.C., Miller, J.D., Schaafsma, A.W., and Hammond, B.G., 2005. Modeling effects of environment, insect damage, and Bt genotypes on fumonisin accumulation in maize in Argentina and the Philippines. Mycopathologia 159: 539–552.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Demont, M., and Tollens, E., 2004. First impact of biotechnology in the EU: Bt maize adoption in Spain. Annals of Applied Biology 145: 197–207.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Falck-Zepeda, J.B., Traxler, G., and Nelson, R.G., 2000. Surplus distribution from the introduction of a biotechnology innovation. American Journal of Agricultural Economics 82: 360–369.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Fernandez-Cornejo, J., and Caswell, M., 2006. The First Decade of Genetically Engineered Crops in the United States. Economic Information Bulletin No. 11, United States Department of Agriculture, Washington, DC, USA.Google Scholar
  12. Fernandez-Cornejo, J., and Li, J., 2005. The impacts of adopting genetically engineered crops in the USA: The case of Bt corn. Selected paper presented at the American Agricultural Economics Association Annual Meetings, Providence, RI, USA.Google Scholar
  13. Florax, R.J.G.M., Travisi, C.M., and Nijkamp, P., 2005. A meta-analysis of the willingness to pay for reductions in pesticide risk exposure. European Review of Agricultural Economics 32: 441–467.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Gómez-Barbero, M., and Rodríguez-Cerezo, E., 2006. GM Crops in EU Agriculture; Case Study for the BIO4EU Project. European Commission, Institute for Prospective Technological Studies, Seville, Spain.Google Scholar
  15. Gonzales, L., 2002. Likely transcendental effects of agri-biotechnology: The case of Bt hybrid corn in the Philippines. Paper presented at the Symposium on Bt Technology, University of the Philippines, Los Baños.Google Scholar
  16. Gouse, M., Pray, C., and Schimmelpfennig, D., 2004. The distribution of benefits from Bt cotton adoption in South Africa. AgBioForum 7: 187–194.Google Scholar
  17. Gouse, M., Pray, C., Schimmelpfennig, D., and Kirsten, J., 2006. Three seasons of subsistence insect-resistant maize in South Africa: Have smallholders benefited? AgBioForum 9: 15–22.Google Scholar
  18. GRAIN (Genetic Resource Action International), 2004. New Studies Contradict FAO Report and Show That Genetically Engineered Bt Cotton Fails to Benefit Farmers. Genetic Resource Action International, Barcelona, Spain. http://www.grain.org/research/btcotton.cfm?id=129 (accessed 9 November 2007).
  19. Herring, R., 2007. Stealth seeds: Biopiracy, biosafety, biopolitics. Journal of Development Studies 43: 130–157.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Hossain, F., Pray, C.E., Lu, Y., Huang, J., and Hu, R., 2004. Genetically modified cotton and farmers’ health in China. International Journal of Occupational and Environmental Health 10: 296–303.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. Hu, R., Huang, J., Lin, H., and Rozelle, S., 2006. Bt cotton in China: Are secondary insect infestations offsetting the benefits in farmer fields? Paper presented at the 10th International Consortium of Agricultural Biotechnology Research Conference, June 29–July 2, Ravello, Italy.Google Scholar
  22. Huang, J., Hu, R., Rozelle, S., Qiao, F., and Pray, C.E., 2002. Transgenic varieties and productivity of smallholder cotton farmers in China. Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics 46: 367–387.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Huang, J., Hu, R., Rozelle, S., and Pray, C., 2005. Insect-resistant GM rice in farmers’ fields: Assessing productivity and health effects in China. Science 308: 688–690.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. James, C., 1997. Global Status of Transgenic Crops in 1997. ISAAA Brief No. 5, International Service for the Acquisition of Agri-biotech Applications, Ithaca, NY, USA.Google Scholar
  25. James, C., 2007. Global Status of Commercialized Biotech/GM Crops: 2007. ISAAA Brief No. 37, International Service for the Acquisition of Agri-biotech Applications, Ithaca, NY, USA.Google Scholar
  26. Kaniewski, W.K., and Thomas, P.E., 2004. The potato story. AgBioForum 7: 41–46.Google Scholar
  27. Krishna, V.V., and Qaim, M., 2007. Estimating the adoption of Bt eggplant in India: Who benefits from public-private partnership? Food Policy 32: 523–543.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Krishna, V.V., and Qaim, M., 2008a. Potential impacts of Bt eggplant on economic surplus and farmers’ health in India. Agricultural Economics 38: 167–180.Google Scholar
  29. Krishna, V.V., and Qaim, M., 2008b. Consumer attitudes towards GM food and pesticide residues in India. Review of Agricultural Economics 30: 233–251.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Lichtenberg, E., and Zilberman, D., 1986. The economics of damage control: Why specification matters. American Journal of Agricultural Economics 68: 261–273.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Lusk, J.L., Jamal, M., Kurlander, L., Roucan, M., and Taulman, L., 2005. A meta-analysis of genetically modified food valuation studies. Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics 30: 28–44.Google Scholar
  32. Marasas, W.F.O., 2001. Discovery and occurrence of the fumonisins: A historical perspective. Environmental Health Perspectives 109 (Supplement 2): 239–243.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Maumbe, B.M., and Swinton, S.M., 2003. Hidden health costs of pesticide use in Zimbabwe’s smallholder cotton growers. Social Science and Medicine 57: 1559–1571.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Morse, S., Bennett, R., and Ismael, Y., 2004. Why Bt cotton pays for small-scale producers in South Africa. Nature Biotechnology 22: 379–380.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Munkvold, G.P., and Hellmich, R.L., 1999. Comparison of fumonisin concentrations in kernels of transgenic Bt maize hybrids and nontransgenic hybrids. Plant Disease 83: 130–138.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Murugkar, M., Ramaswami, B., and Shelar, M., 2006. Liberalization, Biotechnology, and the Private Seed Sector: The Case of India’s Cotton Seed Market. Mimeo, Indian Statistical Institute, New Delhi, India.Google Scholar
  37. Naseem, A., and Pray, C., 2004. Economic impact analysis of genetically modified crops. In: Handbook of Plant Biotechnology, P. Christou and H. Klee, eds., Wiley, Chichester, UK, pp. 959–991.Google Scholar
  38. Pray, C.E., Ma, D., Huang, J., and Qiao, F., 2001. Impact of Bt cotton in China. World Development 29: 813–825.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Pray, C.E., Huang, J., Hu, R., and Rozelle, S., 2002. Five years of Bt cotton in China - the benefits continue. The Plant Journal 31: 423–430.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Pray, C.E., Bengali, P., and Ramaswami, B., 2005. The cost of biosafety regulations: The Indian experience. Quarterly Journal of International Agriculture 44: 267–289.Google Scholar
  41. Pray, C.E., Huang, J., Hu, R., Wang, Q., Ramaswami, B., and Bengali, P., 2006a. Benefits and costs of biosafety regulation in India and China. In: Regulating Agricultural Biotechnology: Economics and Policy, R.E. Just, J.M. Alston and D. Zilberman, eds., Springer, New York, USA.Google Scholar
  42. Pray, C.E., Ramaswami, B., Huang, J., Bengali, P., Hu, R., and Zhang, H., 2006b. Costs and enforcement of biosafety regulation in India and China. International Journal of Technology and Globalization 2: 137–157.Google Scholar
  43. Price, G.K., Lin, W., Falck-Zepeda, J.B., and Fernandez-Cornejo, J., 2003. The Size and Distribution of Market Benefits from Adopting Agricultural Biotechnology. Technical Bulletin No. 1906, United States Department of Agriculture, Washington, DC, USA.Google Scholar
  44. Qaim, M., 2003. Bt cotton in India: Field trial results and economic projections. World Development 31: 2115–2127.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Qaim, M., 2005. Agricultural biotechnology adoption in developing countries. American Journal of Agricultural Economics 87: 1317–1324.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Qaim, M., and de Janvry, A., 2003. Genetically modified crops, corporate pricing strategies, and farmers’ adoption: The case of Bt cotton in Argentina. American Journal of Agricultural Economics 85: 814–828.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Qaim, M., and de Janvry, A., 2005. Bt cotton and pesticide use in Argentina: Economic and environmental effects. Environment and Development Economics 10: 179–200.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Qaim, M., and Matuschke, I., 2005. Impacts of genetically modified crops in developing countries: A survey. Quarterly Journal of International Agriculture 44: 207–227.Google Scholar
  49. Qaim, M., and Zilberman, D., 2003. Yield effects of genetically modified crops in developing countries. Science 299: 900–902.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Qaim, M., Yarkin, C., and Zilberman, D., 2005. Impact of biotechnology on crop genetic diversity. In: Agricultural Biodiversity and Biotechnology in Economic Development, J. Cooper, L.M. Lipper and D. Zilberman, eds., Springer, New York, USA, pp. 283–307.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Qaim, M., Subramanian, A., Naik, G., and Zilberman, D., 2006. Adoption of Bt cotton and impact variability: Insights from India. Review of Agricultural Economics 28: 48–58.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Sahai, S., and Rahman, S., 2003. Performance of Bt Cotton in India: Data from the First Commercial Crop. Gene Campaign, New Delhi, India.Google Scholar
  53. Shelton, A.M., Zhao, J.-Z., and Roush, R.T., 2002. Economic, ecological, food safety, and social consequences of the deployment of Bt transgenic plants. Annual Review of Entomology 47: 845–881.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Sunding, D., and Zivin, J., 2000. Insect population dynamics, pesticide use and farm-worker health. American Journal of Agricultural Economics 82: 527–540.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Thirtle, C., Beyers, L., Ismael, Y., and Piesse, J., 2003. Can GM-technologies help the poor? The impact of Bt cotton in Makhathini Flats, KwaZulu-Natal. World Development 31: 717–732.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Traxler, G., Godoy-Avila, S., Falck-Zepeda, J., and Espinoza-Arellano, J., 2003. Transgenic cotton in Mexico: Economic and environmental impacts. In: Economic and Environmental Impacts of First Generation Biotechnologies, N. Kalaitzandonakes, ed., Kluwer, New York, USA, pp. 183–202.Google Scholar
  57. Turner, P.C., Moore, S.E., Hall, A.J., Prentice, A.M., and Wild, C.P., 2003. Modification of immune function through exposure to dietary aflatoxin in Gambian children. Environmental Health Perspectives 111: 217–220.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  58. Umali-Deininger, D., and Sur, M., 2006. Food safety in a globalizing world: Opportunities and challenges for India. Plenary paper presented at the 26th International Association of Agricultural Economists (IAAE) Conference, August 12–18, Gold Coast, Australia.Google Scholar
  59. USDA (United States Department of Agriculture), 2007. Adoption of Genetically Engineered Crops in the US. United States Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service, Washington, DC, USA.Google Scholar
  60. Wang, S., Just, D., and Pinstrup-Andersen, P., 2006. Tarnishing silver bullets: Bt technology adoption, bounded rationality and the outbreak of secondary pest infestations in China. Selected paper presented at the American Agricultural Economics Association Annual Meetings, Long Beach, CA, USA.Google Scholar
  61. Welsh, R., and Ervin, D., 2006. Precaution as an approach to technology development: The case of transgenic crops. Science, Technology and Human Values 31: 153–172.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Wu, F., 2002. Bt or not Bt? Tools for regulatory decisions concerning genetically modified corn. Ph.D. dissertation, Engineering and Public Policy, Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh, PA, USA.Google Scholar
  63. Wu, F., 2006. Mycotoxin reduction in Bt corn: Potential economic, health, and regulatory impacts. ISB News Report, September, pp. 8–11.Google Scholar
  64. Zilberman, D., Ameden, H., Graff, G., and Qaim, M., 2004. Agricultural biotechnology: Productivity, biodiversity, and intellectual property rights. Journal of Agricultural & Food Industrial Organization (online), 2 (2), article 3. Available at:http://www.bepress.com/jafio/vol2/iss2/art3.

Copyright information

© Springer Science + Business Media B.V 2008

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Georg-August-University of GoettingenGoettingenGermany
  2. 2.Rutgers UniversityNew BrunswickUSA
  3. 3.University of CaliforniaBerkeleyUSA

Personalised recommendations