Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

From Genetic Engineering to Gene Editing: Harnessing Advances in Biology for National Economic Development

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Bioeconomy for Sustainable Development

  • 1031 Accesses

Abstract

This chapter has examined the nature and adoption of biotechnologies, socio-economic impacts, regulatory frameworks and concerns for rising farm incomes in a cross-country perspective. The product development in biotech has been moving from just insect/herbicide resistance to breaking yield barriers, drought tolerance and quality enhancing traits, just from 3 to 31 crops, a large share of acreage in developing countries and increasing penetration of public sector. The frontiers have been moving forward with the fundamental breakthrough in the form of CRISPR-Cas 9 technique with wide-ranging applications. A rigorous study of peer-reviewed literature shows that GE crop cultivation has increased yields and net income, reduced pesticide usage and helped conserve tillage. Biosafety laws have been stifling product development, and therefore harnessing biotechnologies necessitate enabling policies like a legal framework for biosafety, labelling and trans-boundary movement. Developing countries need to put in place regulations for the new plant breeding techniques on par with the conventional plant breeding techniques. The policy implications have been then drawn for utilization of opportunities in advancement of biotechnology for developing country agriculture.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 149.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 199.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 199.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  • Acemoglu D, Robinson JA (2012) Why nations fail: origins of power, prosperity and poverty. Profile Books Ltd., London

    Google Scholar 

  • Adato M, Meinzen-Dick R, Hazell P, Lawrence H (2007) Integrating social and economic analyses to study impacts on livelihoods and poverty: conceptual frameworks and research methods. In: Adato M, Meinzen-Dick R (eds) Agricultural research, livelihoods, and poverty: studies of economic and social impacts in six countries. Johns Hopkins University Press, Baltimore, pp 20–55

    Google Scholar 

  • Adenle AA, Morris EJ, Murphy DJ, Phillips PWB, Trigo E, Learns P, Quemada Y, Li H, Falck-Zepeda J, Komen J (2018) Rationalizing governance of genetically modified products in developing countries. Nat Biotechnol 36(2):137–139

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Ahluwalia MS (1978) Rural poverty and agricultural performance in India. J Dev Stud 14:298–323

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Anderson K (2010) Economic impacts of policies affecting crop biotechnology and trade. New Biotechnol 27(5):558–564

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Anderson K, Valenzuela E, Jackson LA (2008) Recent and prospective adoption of genetically modified cotton: a global CGE analysis of economic impacts. Econ Dev Cult Chang 56:265–296

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Areal FJ, Riesgo L, Rodriguez-Cerezo E (2013) Economic and agronomic impact of commercialized GM crops: a meta-analysis. J Agric Sci 151:7–33

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Armstrong S, Westland T (2016) Escaping the middle income trap. East Asia Forum Blog. Retrieved from http://www.eastasiaforum.org/2016/03/28/escaping-the-middle-income-trap

  • Ashok KR, Giuliani AM, Thilagavathi SV, Raj R, Ramamoorthy MD, Sanjeevi Kumar A (2017) Trait valuation in genetically modified crops: an ex-ante analysis of GM cassava against cassava mosaic disease. Agric Econ Res Rev 30(2):223–234

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bailey R (2002) The looming trade war over plant biotechnology. Cato Trade Policy Analysis, 18. Center for Trade Policy Studies, Cato Institute, Washington, DC

    Google Scholar 

  • Bansal S, Gruere GP (2012) Implications of mandatory labelling of GM food in India: evidence from the supply side. Food Policy 37(4):467–472

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barrett C, Carter MR, Timmer CP (2010) A century-long perspective on agricultural development. Am J Agric Econ 92(32):447–468

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Boccaletti S, Farncesca P, Soregaroli C (2017) Segregation between GM and non-GM inputs and EU feed and food supply chains, future scenarios. AgBioforum 20(1):1–13

    Google Scholar 

  • Bortesi L, Fischer R (2015) The CRISPR/Cas9 system for plant genome editing and beyond. Biotechnol Adv 33(1):41–52

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Bouis HE, Saltzman A, Birol E (2019) Improving nutrition through Biofortification. In: Fan S, Yosef S, Pandya-Lorch R (eds) Agriculture for improved nutrition: seizing the momentum. CAB International

    Google Scholar 

  • Brewin DG, Malla S (2012) The consequences of biotechnology: a broad view of the changes in the Canadian canola sector, 1969–2012. AgBioforum 15(3):257–275

    Google Scholar 

  • Brookes G (2005) The farm level impact of using round up ready soybeans in Romania. AgBioforum 8(4):235–241

    Google Scholar 

  • Brookes G, Barfoot P (2015) GM crops: global socio-economic and environmental impacts 1996–2013. PG Economics Ltd., Dorchester

    Google Scholar 

  • Brookes G, Barfoot P (2018a) Farm income and production impacts of using GM crop technology 1996– 2016. GM Crops Food 9(1):59–89

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brookes G, Barfoot P (2018b) Environmental impacts of genetically modified (GM) crop use 1996–2016: impacts on pesticide use and carbon emissions. GMCrops Food 9(3):109–139

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bryant H, Maisashvili A, Outlaw J, Richardson J (2016) Effects of proposed mergers and acquisitions among biotechnology firms on seed prices. Working Paper16-2, Agricultural and Food Policy Centre, Department of Agricultural Economics, Texas A&M Agri Life Extension Services, Texas A&M University. Retrieved from http://www.afpc/tamu.edu/

  • Carpenter JE (2010) Peer-reviewed surveys indicate positive impact of commercialized crops. Nat Biotechnol 28:319–321

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Carpenter J, Felsot A, Goode T, Hamming M (2002) Comparative environmental impacts of biotechnology-derived and traditional soybean, corn, and cotton crops. Council for Agricultural Science and Technology, Ames

    Google Scholar 

  • Carriere Y, Ellers-Kirk C, Sisterson M, Antilla L, Whitlow M, Timothy JD, Tabashinik BE (2003) Long-term regional suppression of pink bollworm by Bacillus thuringiensis cotton. Proc Natl Acad Sci 100(4):1519–1523

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Craig W, Obonyo DN, Tepfer M (2017) A strategy for integrating science into regulatory decision-making for GMOs: in genetically modified organisms in developing countries. In: Adenle AA, Morris EJ, Murphy D (eds) Risk analysis and governance. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp 26–38

    Google Scholar 

  • Dalrymple DG (2008) International agricultural research as a global public good: concepts, the CGIAR experience, and policy issues. J Int Dev 20:347–379

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • De Faria RN, Wieck C (2015) Empirical evidence on the trade impact of asynchronous regulatory approval of new GMO events. Food Policy 53:22–32

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • de Janvry A, Sadoulet E (2002) World poverty and the role of agricultural technology: direct and indirect effects. J Dev Stud 38(4):1–26

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dev SM, Rao CN (2010) Agricultural price policy, farm profitability and food security. Econ Political Wkly 45(26–27):174–182

    Google Scholar 

  • Durr J (2016) The political economy of agriculture for development today: the “small versus large” scale debate revisited. Agric Econ 47:1–11

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • EFSA (2012) Scientific opinion addressing the safety assessment of plants developed using zinc finger nuclease 3 and other site-directed nucleases with similar function. EFSA J 10(10):2943

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Eichengreen B, Park D, Shin K (2013) Growth slowdown redux: new evidence on the middle-income trap. Working Paper No. 18673. National Bureau of Economic Research, Cambridge, USA

    Google Scholar 

  • Fabrick JA et al (2014) Alternative splicing and highly variable cadherin transcripts associated with field-evolved resistance of pink bollworm to Bt cotton in India. PLoS One 9(5):1–13

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Falck-Zepeda JB, Traxler G, Nelson RG (2000) Surplus distribution from the introduction of a biotechnology innovation. Am J Agric Econ 82(2):360–369

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fernandez-Cornejo J, McBride WD (2002) Adoption of bioengineered crops. Agricultural Economic Report NO.810. US Department of Agriculture

    Google Scholar 

  • Fernandez-Cornejo, Hendricks C, Mishra A (2005) Technology adoption and Off-Farm household income: the case of herbicide-tolerant soybeans. J Agric Appl Econ 37(2):549–563

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Finger R et al (2011) A meta-analysis on farm-level costs and benefits of GM crops. Sustainability 3:743–762

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fitt GP (2003) Implementation and impact of transgenic Bt cottons in Australia. ICAC Recorder 21(4):14–19

    Google Scholar 

  • Ghouse M, Piesse J, Thirtle C, Poulton C (2009) Assessing the performance of GM maize amongst stall holders in KwaZulu-Natal, South Africa. AgBioforum 12(1):78–89

    Google Scholar 

  • Ghouse M, Sengupta D, Zambrano P, Falck-Zepeda J (2016) Genetically modified: less drudgery for her, more maize for him? Evidence from smallholder maize farmers in South Africa. World Dev 83:27–38

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Graff G, Zilberman D (2016) How the ‘IP-Regulatory’ complex affects incentives to develop socially desirable products from agricultural genomics. In: Marden E, Godfrey RN, Manion R (eds) The intellectual property- regulatory complex: overcoming barriers to innovation in agricultural genomics. University of British Columbia Press, Vancouver

    Google Scholar 

  • Graff G, Hochman G, Suntharlingam C, Zilberman D (2015) The competing policy paradigms of agricultural biotechnology: implications and opportunities for emerging and developing economies. AgBioforum 18(2):168–181

    Google Scholar 

  • Gruere G, Sengupta D (2011) Bt cotton and farmer suicides in India: an evidence-based assessment. J Dev Stud 47(2):316–337

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gruere G, Sun Y (2012) Measuring the contribution of Bt cotton adoption to India’s cotton yields leap. IFPRI Discussion Paper 01170, April. International Food Policy Research Institute, Washington, DC

    Google Scholar 

  • Guenthner JF (2017) Economic and environmental benefits of biotech potatoes with traits for bruise resistance, late blight resistance, and cold storage. AgBioforum 20(1):37–45

    Google Scholar 

  • Gullickson G (2018) 10 Ag mergers and acquisitions from 2017. Available at: http://news.agropages.com/News/NewsDetail%2D%2D-24882-e.htm. Accessed on 27 May 2019

  • Gupta A (2011) An evolving science-society contract in India: the search for legitimacy in anticipatory risk governance. Food Policy 36:736–741

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hall C, Knight B, Ringrose S, Knox O (2013) What have been the farm-level economic impacts of the global cultivation of GM crops? Syst Rev. CEE review11-002, Collaboration for Environmental Evidence Library. Retrieved from www.environmentalevidence.org/SR110

  • Hazell PBR (2009) The Asian green revolution. IFPRI Discussion Paper No. 00911. International Food Policy Research Institute, Washington, DC

    Google Scholar 

  • Hefferon KL, Herring RJ (2017) The end of the GMO? Genome editing, gene drives and new frontiers of plant technology. Rev Agrar Stud 7(1):1–32

    Google Scholar 

  • Heller MA, Eisenberg RS (1998) Can patents deter innovation? The anti commons in biomedical research. Science 280:698–701

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Herring RJ, Paarlberg R (2016) The political economy of biotechnology. Ann Rev Resour Econ 8(8):1–8. Retrieved from http://www.annualreviews.org/journal/resource

    Google Scholar 

  • Howard PH (2015) Intellectual property and consolidation in the seed industry. Crop Sci 55(2015):1–7

    Google Scholar 

  • Hutchison WD et al (2010) Area wide suppression of European corn borer with Bt maize reaps savings to non-Bt maize growers. Science 330:222–225

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • ISAAA (2017) Global status of commercialised Biotech/GM crops in 2017: biotech crop adoption surges as economic benefits accumulate in 22 years. ISAAA Brief 53. International Service for the Acquisition of Agri-Biotech Applications

    Google Scholar 

  • Jaganathan D, Ramasamy K, Sellamuthu G, Jayabalan S, Venkataraman G (2018) CRISPR for crop improvement, an update review. Front Plant Sci 9:985

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jander G, Baerson SR, Hudak JA, Gonzalez KA, Gruys K, Gomez E et al (2003) Ethylmethanesulfonate saturation mutagenesis in Arabidopsis to determine frequency of herbicide resistance. Plant Physiol 131(1):139–146

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Jefferson DJ, Padmanabhan MS (2016) Recent evolutions in intellectual property frameworks for agricultural biotechnology: a worldwide survey. Asian Biotechnol Dev Rev 18(1):47–67

    Google Scholar 

  • Kalaitzandonakes N, Kruse J, Gouse M (2015) The potential economic impacts of herbicide tolerant maize in developing countries: review and evidence from Kenya. AgBioforum 18(2):221–238

    Google Scholar 

  • Kathage J, Qaim M (2012) Economic impacts and impact dynamics of Bt cotton in India. Proc Natl Acad Sci 109(29):1652–11656

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Klumper W, Qaim M (2014) A meta-analysis of the impacts of genetically modified crops. Plos-One 9(11–29):1–7. Retrieved from http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0111629

    Google Scholar 

  • Kniss A (2008) Farm-scale analysis of glyphosate-resistant sugar beet the year of commercial introduction in Wyoming. International Weed Science Society Annual Meeting

    Google Scholar 

  • Kolodinsky J, Lusk JL (2018) Mandatory labels can improve toward genetically engineered food. Sci Adv 4(6):1413

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kouser S, Qaim M (2011) Impact of Bt cotton on pesticide poisoning in smallholder agriculture: a panel data analysis. Ecol Econ 70(11):2015–2013

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kouser S, Qaim M (2013) Genetically modified crops and food security. PLoS One. open access journal, June

    Google Scholar 

  • Kranthi KR (2015) Pink bollworm strikes cotton again. Cotton Statistics and News No.35. Retrieved from http://www.cicr.org.in/pdf/Kranthi_art/Pinkbollworm.pdf

  • Krishna V, Qaim M (2012) Bt cotton and sustainability of pesticide reductions in India. Agric Syst 107:47–55

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lassoued R, Stuart JS, Peter WBP, Hayley H (2018) Regulatory uncertainty around new breeding techniques. Front Plant Sci 9:1291

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lewis A (1954) Economic development with unlimited supplies of labor. In: Gersovitz M (ed) Selected economic writings of W. Arthur Lewis. New York University Press, 1983

    Google Scholar 

  • Lianos I, Katalevsky D, Ivanov A (2016) The global seed market, competition law and intellectual property rights: untying the Gordian knot. Research Paper Series: 2/2016. Centre for Law, Economics and Society, University of London. Retrieved from www.ucl.ac.uk/cles/research-paper-series

  • Lichtenberg E, Zilberman D (1986) The econometrics of damage control: why specification matters. Am J Agric Econ 68:261–273

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Marra MC, Piggott NE, Carlson GA (2004) The net benefits, including convenience, of roundup ready soybean: results from a national survey. Technical Bulletin 2004-3. NSF Centre for IPM, Raleigh

    Google Scholar 

  • Mellor JW (2006) Pro-poor growth- the relation between agricultural growth and poverty reduction. In: Radhakrishna R, Rao SK, Dev SM, Subbarao K (eds) India in a globalising world: some aspects of macro economy, agriculture and poverty. Academic Foundation, New Delhi

    Google Scholar 

  • Morris EJ (2017) Biosafety regulatory systems in Africa. In: David PK, Makinde D, Weebadde CK, Maredia K (eds) Biosafety in Africa, experiences and best practices

    Google Scholar 

  • Morse S, Mannion AM, Evans C (2012) Location, location, location: presenting evidence for genetically modified crops. Appl Geogr 34:274–280

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Muller C, Robertson RD (2014) Projecting future crop productivity for global economic modelling. Agric Econ 45:37–50

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • NASEM (2016) Genetically engineered crops: experiences and prospects. The National Academies Press, Washington, DC. Retrieved fromwww.nap.edu

    Google Scholar 

  • Otuska K (2013) Food insecurity, income inequality, and the changing comparative advantage in world agriculture. Agric Econ 44:7–18

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pardey PG, Chan-Kang C, Beddow JM, Dehmer SP (2015) Long-run and Global R&D Funding Trajectories: the U.S. farm bill in a changing context. Am J Agric Econ 97(5):1312–1323

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pingali P (2012) Green revolution: impacts, limits and the path ahead. Proc Natl Acad Sci 109(31):12302–12308

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Pray CE, Huang JHR, Rozelle S (2002) Five years of Bt cotton in China- the benefits continue. Plant J 31:423–430

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Punt MJ, Venus TJ, Justus W (2017) The costs of coexistence on farms in Germany. AgBioforum 20(1):24–36

    Google Scholar 

  • Purnhagen KP, Esther K, Kleter G, Schebesta H, Visser RGG, Justus W (2018) EU court casts new plant breeding techniques into regulatory limbo. Nat Biotechnol 36(9):799–800

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Qaim M (2009) The economics of genetically modified crops. Ann Rev Resour Econ 1:665–693

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Qaim M (2016) Genetically modified crops and agricultural development. Palgrave Macmillan, New York

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Qaim M, de Janvry A (2003) Genetically modified crops, corporate pricing strategies, and farmers’ adoption: the case of Bt cotton in Argentina. Am J Agric Econ 85(4):814–828

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Qaim M, Traxler G (2005) Roundup ready soybeans in Argentina: farm level and aggregate welfare effects. Agric Econ 32:73–86

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Qiao F (2015) Fifteen years of Bt cotton in China: the economic impact and its dynamics. World Dev 70:177–185

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rao NC (2004) Plant biotechnology and the emerging scenario. Rev Dev Chang 9(1):69–92

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rao NC (2013) Bt cotton yields and performance: data and methodological issues. Econ Political Wkly 48(33):66–69

    Google Scholar 

  • Rao NC (2015) Disadvantaged regions and social groups: is there a way out? Indian J Agric Econ 70(3):438–449

    Google Scholar 

  • Rao NC, Dev SM (2009) Biotechnology and pro-poor agricultural development. Econ Polit Wkly 44(52):56–56

    Google Scholar 

  • Rao NC, Dev SM (2010) Biotechnology in Indian agriculture: potential, performance and concerns. Academic Foundation, New Delhi

    Google Scholar 

  • Rao NC, Pray CE, Herring RJ (2015) Biotechnology for a second green revolution in India: socioeconomic, political and public policy issues. AgBioforum 18(2):126–141. Retrieved from www.agbioforum.org

    Google Scholar 

  • Rao NC, Carl EP, Ronald JH (2018) Biotechnology for second green revolution in India, overview of issues. In: Rao NCS, Pray CE, Herring RJ (eds) Biotechnology for a second green revolution in India, socioeconomic, political and public policy issues. Academic Foundation, New Delhi

    Google Scholar 

  • Ravi B (2013) Gene patents in India: gauging policy by an analysis of the Grants made by the Indian patent office. J Intellect Prop Rights 18(4):323–329

    Google Scholar 

  • Rosado A, Craig W (2017) Biosafety regulatory systems overseeing the use of genetically modified organisms in the Latin America and Caribbean region. AgBioforum 20(2):120–132

    Google Scholar 

  • Schaart JG, Visser RGF (2009) Novel plant breeding techniques-consequences of new genetic modification-based plant breeding techniques in comparison to conventional plant breeding (Report 2009-02). The Netherlands Commission on Genetic Modification (COGEM), Bilthoven, pp 2785–2794

    Google Scholar 

  • Schultz TW (1964) Transforming traditional agriculture. Yale University Press, New Haven

    Google Scholar 

  • Seyran E, Craig W (2018) New breeding techniques and their possible regulation. AgBioforum 21(1):1–12

    Google Scholar 

  • Shiva V (2018) Biodiversity, GMOs, gene drives and militarised mind. Retrieved from http://www.ipsnews.net/2016/07/biodiversity-gmos-gene-drives-and-the-militarised-mind/

  • Smale M, Zambrano P, Paz-Ybarnegaray R, Fernandez-Montano W (2012) A case of resistance: herbicide-tolerant soybeans in Bolivia. AgBioforum 15(2):191–205

    Google Scholar 

  • Smyth SJ, Jose FZ, Karinne L (2016) The costs of regulatory delays for genetically modified crops. Estey J Int Law Trade Policy 17(2):173–195

    Google Scholar 

  • Spielaman D, Nazli H, Ma A, Zambrano P, Zaidi F (2015) Technological opportunity, regulatory uncertainty, and Bt cotton in Pakistan. AgBioforum 18(1):98–112

    Google Scholar 

  • Srinivas KR (2018) Regulating genome edited crops and European court of justice ruling. Asian Biotechnol Dev Rev 20(1–2):89–97

    Google Scholar 

  • Stephens, J., Barakate, A. (2017). Gene editing technologies – ZFNs, TALENs, and CRISPR/Cas9, Encyclopedia of applied plant sciences, 2nd B. Thomas, B. G. Murray, D. J. Murphy (Cambridge, MA: Academic), 157–161. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-394807-6.00242-2

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Stone G (2011) Field versus farm in Warangal: Bt cotton, higher yields and larger questions. World Dev 39(3):387–398

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Subramanian A, Qaim M (2009) Village-wide effects of agricultural biotechnology: the case of Bt cotton in India. World Dev 37(1):256–267

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Subramanian A, Qaim M (2010) The impact of Bt cotton on poor households in rural India. J Dev Stud 46(2):295–311

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Swinnen J, Riera O (2013) The global bio-economy. Agric Econ 44:1–5

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • The Economist (2016) Gene policy transfer. The Economist 23. Retrieved http://www.economist.com/news/china/21697272-china-may-relax-its-almost-total-ban-growing-gm-food-gene-policy-transfer

  • Thirtle C, Beyers L, Ismael Y, Piesse J (2003) Can GM-technologies help the poor? The impact of Bt cotton in Makhathini Flats, Kwa Zulu-Natal. World Dev 31(4):717–732

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Till BJ, Cooper J, Tai TH, Colowit P, Greene EA, Henikoff S, Comai L (2007) Discovery of chemically induced mutations in rice by TILLING. BMC Plant Biol 7:19

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Traxler G, Godoy-Avila S, Falck-Zepeda J, Espinoza-Arellano J (2003) Transgenic cotton in Mexico: a case study of the Comarca Lagunera. In: Kalaitzandonakes N (ed) The economic and environmental impacts of Agbiotech. Kluwer, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • USDA (2015) Argentina annual biotechnology report, GAIN report. United States Department of Agriculture Foreign Agricultural Service

    Google Scholar 

  • Vigani M, Olper A (2012) International trade and endogenous standards: the case of GMO regulations. World Trade Rev 11(3):415–437

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • WB (2007) World Development Report (2008). Agriculture for development. The World Bank, Washington, DC

    Google Scholar 

  • Wilson WW, De Vuyst EA, Taylor RD, Koo WW, Dahl BL (2008) Implications of biotech traits with segregation costs and market segments: the case of roundup ready wheat. Eur Rev Agric Econ 35(1):51–73

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Witsjaksono J, Wei X, Mao S, Gong W, Li Y, Yuan Y (2014) Yield and economic performance of the use of GM cotton worldwide over time: a review and meta-analysis. China Agric Econ Rev 6(4):616–643

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wu KM, Lu YH, Feng HQ, Jiang YY, Zhao JH (2008) Suppression of cotton bollworm in multiple crops in China in areas with Bt toxin-containing cotton. Science 321:1676–1678

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Yorobe JM, Smale M (2012) Impacts of Bt maize on smallholder income in the Philippines. AgBioforum 15(2):152–162

    Google Scholar 

  • Zaidi SSA, Vanderschuren H, Qai M, Mahfouz MM, Kohli A, Mansoor S, Tester M (2019) New plant breeding technologies for food security. Science 363(6434):1390–1391

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Zilberman D, Kim E, Kirschner S, Kaplan S, Reeves J (2013) Technology and the future bio economy. Agric Econ 44:95–102

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Institute of Economic Growth, University of Delhi Enclave, New Delhi, India

    Chandra Sekhara Rao Nuthalapati

Authors
  1. Chandra Sekhara Rao Nuthalapati
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Biochemistry, Institute of Science, Banaras Hindu University, Varanasi, Uttar Pradesh, India

    Chetan Keswani

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2020 Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd.

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Nuthalapati, C.S.R. (2020). From Genetic Engineering to Gene Editing: Harnessing Advances in Biology for National Economic Development. In: Keswani, C. (eds) Bioeconomy for Sustainable Development. Springer, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-13-9431-7_7

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation