Benefits to Producers and Society

  • José Falck-ZepedaEmail author
  • Melinda Smale
Part of the Natural Resource Management and Policy book series (NRMP, volume 37)


Most studies conducted to date about the adoption and impacts of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) have examined the direct, on-farm benefits to producers (Qaim, Ann Rev Resour Econ 1:665–694, 2009; Smale et al., Impacts of Transgenic Crops in Developing Countries during the First Decade: Approaches, Findings, and Future Directions, 2009; Pontifical Academy of Sciences,, 2010; Potrykus and Ammann, Proceedings of a Study Week of the Pontifical Academy of Sciences New Biotechnology 27(5):445–718, 2010; Areal et al. J Agric Sci, doi:10.1017/S0021859612000111, 2012). To estimate on-farm benefits, applied researchers have most often relied on farm data collected through survey interviews to test hypotheses about changes in yield, use of labour and other inputs, costs and returns. The same data can be aggregated to represent benefits to a sector and to society.


Computable General Equilibrium Model Applied Researcher General Equilibrium Analysis Economic Surplus Real Option Model 
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.


  1. Alston JM, Norton GW, Pardey PG (1995) Science under scarcity: principles and practice for agricultural research evaluation and priority setting. Cornell University Press, IthacaGoogle Scholar
  2. Alston JM, Pardey PG (2001) Attribution and other problems in assessing the returns to agricultural R & D. Agric Econ 25:141–152CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Areal FJ, Riesgo L, Rodriguez-Cerezo E (2012) Economic and agronomic impact of commercialized GM crops: a meta-analysis. J Agric Sci. CJO2012 doi:10.1017/S0021859612000111. Accessed Dec 2012Google Scholar
  4. Falck-Zepeda JB, Traxler G, Nelson RG (2000) Surplus distribution from the introduction of a biotechnology innovation. Am J Agric Econ 82(May 2000):360–369CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Demont M, Tollens E (2001) Uncertainties of estimating the welfare effects of agricultural biotechnologies in the European Union. Working Paper Number 58, Department of Agricultural and Environmental Economics, Katholieke Universiteit, LeuvenGoogle Scholar
  6. Falck-Zepeda J, Sanders A, Rogelio Trabanino C, Batallas-Huacon R (2012) Caught between scylla and charybdis: impact estimation issues from the early adoption of GM maize in Honduras. AgBioForum 15(2):138–151.
  7. Hofs JL, Fok M, Vaissayre M (2006) Impact of Bt cotton adoption on pesticide use by smallholders: a 2-year survey in Makhatini Flats (South Africa). Crop Prot 25(9):984–988CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Huang J, Hu R, Fan C et al (2002) Bt cotton benefits, costs, and impacts in China. AgBioForum 5(4):153–166.
  9. National Academy of Sciences of the United States (2000) Transgenic plants and world agriculture. National Academy Press, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  10. Pemsl D, Waibel H, Orphal J (2004) A methodology to assess the profitability of Bt-cotton: case study results from the state of Karnataka, India. Crop Prot 23(12):1249–1257CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Pemsl D, Waibel H, Gutierrez AP (2005) Why do some Bt-cotton farmers in China continue to use high levels of pesticides? Int J Agric Sustain 3(1):44–56CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Pontifical Academy of Sciences (2001) Science and the future of mankind: science for man and man for science. Accessed Dec 2012
  13. Potrykus I, Ammann K (eds) (2010) Proceedings of a Study Week of the Pontifical Academy of Sciences New Biotechnology 27(5):445–718Google Scholar
  14. Qaim M (2009) The economics of genetically modified crops. Ann Rev Resour Econ 1:665–694CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Smale M, Falck-Zepeda J (eds) (2012) Farmers and researchers discovering biotech crops: experiences measuring economic impacts among new adopters. AgBioForum Special Issue 151(1):7–33Google Scholar
  16. Smale M, Zambrano P, Gruère G et al (2009) Impacts of transgenic crops in developing countries during the first decade: approaches, findings, and future directions. IFPRI Food Policy Review 10. International Food Policy Research Institute, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  17. Smyth SJ, Phillips PWB, Castle D (eds) (forthcoming) Handbook on agriculture, biotechnology and development. Edward Elgar Publishing, CheltenhamGoogle Scholar
  18. Tripp R (2000) Can biotechnology reach the poor? The adequacy of seed and information delivery. Paper presented at the 4th International Conference on the Economics of Agricultural Biotechnology, Ravello, Italy, 24–28 August 2000Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI)WashingtonUSA
  2. 2.207 Agriculture HallMichigan State UniversityEast LansingUSA

Personalised recommendations