Advertisement

Adoption of Herbicide Tolerant Soybeans in Argentina: An Economic Analysis

  • Julio A. Penna
  • Daniel Lema

Abstract

Soybean cultivation was introduced in the Pampean region of Argentina in the 1970s, and has been characterized by an incredible rate of adoption and growth. In 1970–71, soybean production amounted to 59,000 tons, with a crop area of approximately 38,000 hectares. Only ten years later, in the 1980–81 season, production increased to 4 million tons and the crop area to over 2 million hectares. In the 2000–012 season, the planted area exceeded 10 million hectares and the output was estimated to be 23–25 million tons. As for utilization, soybeans and related products (oil and flour) represent 15% of Argentina’s total exports. Argentina is the world’s largest exporter of soybean oil (30% of the world exports) and the second largest exporter of soybean flour (27% of the world exports). These figures allude to the rising importance of soybeans to Argentina.

Keywords

Crop Area Traditional Variety World Export Pampean Region Roundup Ready 
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. Ablin, E., & Paz, S. (2000). Productos transgénicos y exportaciones agricolas: Reflexiones en torno de un dilema argentino. Dirección National de Negociaciones Económicas y Cooperación International. Argentina: Ministry of Foreign Affairs.Google Scholar
  2. Aguirre, S., & Segura, L. (1999). Encuesta de adoptión de soja transgénica-campaña. Soja- Información Para Extensión, INTA-EEA Marcos Juárez, 1998/99:59.Google Scholar
  3. Carpenter, J., & Gianessi, L. (1999). Herbicide tolerant soybeans: Why growers are adopting Roundup Ready varieties. AgBioForum, 2(2), 65–72.Google Scholar
  4. Cazenave and Associates. (2000). Argentine agricultural sector consulting report.Google Scholar
  5. Galperín, C., Fernández, L., & Doporto, I. (2000). Los efectos potenciales del etiquetado de productos elaborados a partir de OGM: El caso del complejo sojero argentino. Proceedings of the Asociación Argentina de Economía Politica annual meetings 2000; Córdoba, Argentina.Google Scholar
  6. Laura, G., & Baigorri, H. (Eds.). (1997). El cultivo de la soja en Argentina. Manfredi, Argentina: INTA-Centro Regional Córdoba, EEA Marcos Juárez.Google Scholar
  7. Hardaker, J. B., Huirne, R.B.M., & Anderson, J.R. (1997). Coping with Risk in Agriculture. Oxford: CAB International.Google Scholar
  8. Kalaitzandonakes, N. (1999). A farm-level perspective on agrobiotechnology: How much value and for whom? AgBioForum, 2(2), 61–64.Google Scholar
  9. Macagno, L., & Gómez Chao, V. (1993). Impacto de la investigación en trigo en la Argentina. Un análisis económico „ex-post“. Simposio International La investigatión agrícola en la Argentina. Impactos y necesidades de inversión. INTA-IICA, University of Minnesota.Google Scholar
  10. Mousegne, F. (2001, January). Personal Communication. INTA-Agencia de Extensión Rural San Antonio de Areco, Argentina.Google Scholar
  11. Penna, J., Devoto, R., & Cuesta, G. (1998). Mercados estratégicos para el complejo oleaginoso argentino: El caso de la harina de soja. Argentina: Documento de Trabajo N° 3 Institute) de Economía y Sociología, INTA.Google Scholar
  12. Penna, J, Macagno, L., & Merchante Navarro, G. (1983). Difusión de las variedades de trigo con germoplasma mexicano y su impacto en la producción nacional. Un análisis económico. Argentina: Documento de trabajo N° 3. Departamento de Economía, INTA.Google Scholar
  13. Peretti, M., & Ghida Daza, C. (1995). Aspectos económicos del cultivo. In Manual de soja. Campaña 95/96, Proyecto IPG, INTA-EEA Marcos JuárezGoogle Scholar
  14. Sobral, R., Puentes, I., & Moscatelli, G. (2000). Evolutión de la erosión hídrica en San Antionio de Areco (Buenos Aires). INTA-Instituto de Suelos. Unpublished manuscript, forthcoming in Argentine Soil Association, 1995.Google Scholar
  15. White, D. (2000). Personal communication. Mora y Araujo Consultores.Google Scholar
  16. White, D. (1997). Biotecnologia agricola: Actitud del sector argentino. Revista Agromercado.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2003

Authors and Affiliations

  • Julio A. Penna
    • 1
  • Daniel Lema
    • 1
  1. 1.The National Institute of Agricultural Technology (INTA)/Institute of Economics and SociologyBuenos AiresArgentina

Personalised recommendations