Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Global Economic Impact of Transgenic/Biotech Crops (1996–2008)

  • Reference work entry
Encyclopedia of Sustainability Science and Technology

  • 252 Accesses

Definition of the Subject

The application of biotechnology to commercial agriculture on a widespread basis has occurred since 1996. The extent of this adoption in terms of crops and (biotechnology) traits is explored and the associated economic impacts for the period 1996–2008 are assessed, to help identify some of the main reasons why farmers have adopted the technology.

Introduction

This article examines specific global socioeconomic impacts on farm income over the 13-year period 1996–2008. It also quantifies the production impact of the technology on the key crops in areas where it has been used. The analysis concentrates on farm income effects because this is a primary driver of adoption among farmers (both large commercial and small-scale subsistence). It also considers more indirect farm income or nonpecuniary benefits, and quantifies the (net) production impact of the technology. More specifically, it covers the following main issues:

  • Impact on crop yields

  • Effect on key costs of...

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 6,999.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Hardcover Book
USD 549.99
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

Abbreviations

Direct farm income benefit:

Improvements in income arising from changes in yield and production levels or associated with cost reductions/productivity enhancements associated with the use of transgenic crops.

Herbicide tolerance:

Tolerance to a herbicide (e.g., glyphosate) delivered by genetic modification techniques. This allows a crop to be sprayed with the “tolerant herbicide” without harming the crop but providing good weed control.

Insect resistance:

Resistance to a pest (e.g., corn-boring pests) delivered by genetic modification techniques. This allows a crop to be grown without having to use alternative methods of pest control, notably the use of insecticides.

Nonpecuniary benefit:

Additional farm-level benefits to direct farm income benefits that are more intangible and difficult to measure in monetary terms (e.g., additional management flexibility).

No tillage agriculture:

The use of a production technique in which the soil is not tilled/plowed. It is in contrast to traditional plow-based production systems and allows farmers to save on fuel use and contributes to improved soil water retention and reduced soil erosion.

Second crop soybeans:

The planting of a crop of soybeans after another crop (often wheat) in the same growing season. This allows a farmer to obtain two crops from the same piece of land in one season.

Bibliography

  1. Marra M, Piggott N (2006) The value of non pecuniary characteristics of crop biotechnologies: a new look at the evidence, North Carolina State University

    Google Scholar 

  2. Marra M, Piggott N (2007) The net gains to cotton farmers of a national refuge plan for Bollgard II cotton. AgBioforum 10(1):1–10 (www.agbioforum.org)

  3. Marra M, Pardey P, Alston J (2002) The pay-offs of agricultural biotechnology: an assessment of the evidence. International Food Policy Research Institute, Washington, USA

    Google Scholar 

  4. Carpenter J, Gianessi L (1999) Herbicide tolerant soybeans: why growers are adopting roundup ready varieties. AgBioforum 2:65–72

    Google Scholar 

  5. Carpenter J (2001) Comparing Roundup ready and conventional soybean yields 1999. National Centre for Food & Agriculture Policy, Washington

    Google Scholar 

  6. Sankala S, Blumenthal E (2003) Impacts on US agriculture of biotechnology-derived crops planted in 2003 – an update of eleven case studies. NCFAP, Washington, www.ncfap.org

  7. Sankala S, Blumenthal E (2006) Impacts on US agriculture of biotechnology-derived crops planted in 2005 – an update of eleven case studies. NCFAP, Washington, www.ncfap.org

  8. Johnson S, Strom S (2008) Quantification of the impacts on US agriculture of biotechnology-derived crops planted in 2006. NCFAP, Washington, www.ncfap.org

  9. Qaim M, Traxler G (2002) Roundup ready soybeans in Argentina: farm level, environmental and welfare effects. In: 6th ICABR conference, Ravello, Italy

    Google Scholar 

  10. Qaim M, Traxler G (2005) Roundup ready soybeans in Argentina: farm level and aggregate welfare effects. Agric Econ 32(1):73–86

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Parana Department of Agriculture (2004) Cost of production comparison: biotech and conventional soybeans. In: USDA GAIN report BR4629 of 11 November 2004. www.fas.usad.gov/gainfiles/200411/146118108.pdf

  12. Galveo A (2009) Farm survey findings of impact of herbicide tolerant soybeans and insect resistant corn and cotton in Brazil, Celeres, Brazil. www.celeres.co.br

  13. George Morris Centre (2004) Economic and environmental impacts of the commercial cultivation of glyphosate tolerant soybeans in Ontario (Unpublished report for Monsanto, Canada)

    Google Scholar 

  14. Brookes G (2005) The farm level impact of using roundup ready soybeans in Romania. AgBioforum 8(4) (Also available on www.pgeconomics.co.uk)

  15. Monsanto Romania (2007) Roundup ready soybeans: survey growers crops in 2006 and intentions for 2007

    Google Scholar 

  16. Monsanto Comercial Mexico (2005) Official report to Mexican Ministry of Agriculture. (Unpublished)

    Google Scholar 

  17. Monsanto Comercial Mexico (2007) Official report to Mexican Ministry of Agriculture of the 2006 crop. (Unpublished)

    Google Scholar 

  18. Monsanto Comercial Mexico (2008) Official report to Mexican Ministry of Agriculture of the 2008 cotton crop. (Unpublished)

    Google Scholar 

  19. Fernandez W et al (2009) GM soybeans in Bolivia. In: Paper presented to the 13th ICABR conference, Ravello, Italy, June 2009

    Google Scholar 

  20. Doyle B et al (2003) The Performance of roundup ready cotton 2001–2002 in the Australian cotton sector. University of New England, Armidale, Australia

    Google Scholar 

  21. Canola Council of Canada (2001) An agronomic and economic assessment of transgenic canola. Canola Council, Canada, www.canola-council.org

  22. Gusta M et al (2009) Economic benefits of GMHT canola for producers, University of Saskatchewan, College of Biotechnology (Working Paper)

    Google Scholar 

  23. Monsanto Australia (2009) Survey of herbicide tolerant canola licence holders 2008

    Google Scholar 

  24. Fischer J, Tozer P (2009) Evaluation of the environmental and economic impact of roundup ready canola in the Western Australian crop production system. In: Curtin Univeristy of Technology Technical Report 11/2009

    Google Scholar 

  25. Kniss A (2009) Farm scale analysis of glyphosate resistant sugar beet in the year of commercial introduction in Wyoming, University of Wyoming

    Google Scholar 

  26. Khan M (2008) Roundup ready sugar beet in America. British Sugar Beet Review Winter 2008. 76(4):16–19

    Google Scholar 

  27. James C (2003) Global review of commercialized transgenic crops 2002: feature Bt maize, ISAAA No 29

    Google Scholar 

  28. Gianessi L, Carpenter J (1999) Agricultural biotechnology insect control benefits. NCFAP, Washington, USA

    Google Scholar 

  29. Trigo E, Cap E (2006) Ten years of GM crops in Argentine Agriculture, ArgenBio

    Google Scholar 

  30. Gouse M et al (2005) A GM subsistence crop in Africa: the case of Bt white maize in S Africa. Int J Biotechnol 7(1/2/3)

    Google Scholar 

  31. Gouse M et al (2006) Three seasons of insect resistant maize in South Africa: have small farmers benefited. AgBioforum 9(1):15–22

    Google Scholar 

  32. Gouse M et al (2006) Output and labour effect of GM maize and minimum tillage in a communal area of Kwazulu-Natal. J Dev Perspect 2:2

    Google Scholar 

  33. Van der Weld W (2009) Final report on the adoption of GM maize in South Africa for the 2008/09 season. South African Maize Trust

    Google Scholar 

  34. Brookes G (2003) The farm level impact of using Bt maize in Spain, ICABR conference paper 2003, Ravello, Italy (Also on www.pgeconomics.co.uk)

  35. Brookes G (2008) The benefits of adopting GM insect resistant (Bt) maize in the EU: first results from 1998-2006. Int J Biotechnol 10(2/3):148–166 (www.pgeconomics.co.uk.)

  36. Gonsalves D (2005) Harnessing the benefits of biotechnology: the case of Bt corn in the Philippines. ISBN 971-91904-6-9. Strive Foundation, Laguna, Philippines

    Google Scholar 

  37. Yorobe J (2004) Economics impact of Bt corn in the Philippines. In: Paper presented to the 45th PAEDA convention, Querzon City, Philippines

    Google Scholar 

  38. Ramon G (2005) Acceptability survey on the 80–20 bag in a bag insect resistance management strategy Galveo A (2009) Unpublished (in January 2010) data on first survey findings of impact of insect resistant corn (first crop) in Brazil, Celeres, Brazil. www.celeres.co.br

  39. Falck Zepeda J et al (2009) Small ‘resource poor’ countries taking advantage of the new bio-economy and innovation: the case of insect protected and herbicide tolerant corn in Honduras. In: Paper presented to the 13th ICABR conference, Ravello, Italy

    Google Scholar 

  40. Mullins W, Hudson J (2004) Bollgard II versus Bollgard sister line economic comparisons. In: 2004 Beltwide cotton conferences, San Antonio, USA, Jan 2004

    Google Scholar 

  41. Pray C et al (2001) Impact of Bt cotton in China. World Dev 29(5):1–34

    Article  Google Scholar 

  42. Pray C et al (2002) Five years of Bt cotton in China – the benefits continue. Plant J 31(4): 423–430

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  43. Doyle B (2005) The performance of Ingard and Bollgard II cotton in Australia during the 2002/2003 and 2003/2004 seasons. University of New England, Armidale, Australia

    Google Scholar 

  44. Taylor I (2003) Cotton CRC annual report, UNE, Armidale, Cotton Research Institute, Narrabri, Australia

    Google Scholar 

  45. CSIRO (2005) The cotton consultants Australia 2005 Bollgard II comparison report. CSIRO, Australia

    Google Scholar 

  46. Qaim M, De Janvry A (2002) Bt cotton in Argentina: analysing adoption and farmers willingness to pay. American Agricultural Economics Association Annual Meeting, California

    Google Scholar 

  47. Qaim M, De Janvry A (2005) Bt cotton and pesticide use in Argentina: economic and environmental effects. Environ Dev Econ 10:179–200

    Article  Google Scholar 

  48. Elena M (2001) Economic advantages of transgenic cotton in Argentina, INTA. As cited in Trigo and Cap (2006)

    Google Scholar 

  49. Traxler G et al (2001) Transgenic cotton in Mexico: economic and environmental impacts. In: ICABR conference, Ravello, Italy

    Google Scholar 

  50. Martinez-Carillo J, Diaz-Lopez N (2005) Nine years of transgenic cotton in Mexico: adoption and resistance management. In: Proceedings Beltwide Cotton Conference, Memphis, USA, June 2005

    Google Scholar 

  51. Ismael Y et al (2002) A case study of smallholder farmers in the Mahathini flats, South Africa. In: ICABR conference, Ravello Italy 2002

    Google Scholar 

  52. Kirsten J et al (2002) Bt cotton in South Africa: adoption and the impact on farm incomes amongst small-scale and large-scale farmers. In: ICABR conference, Ravello, Italy 2002

    Google Scholar 

  53. Morse S et al (2004) Why Bt cotton pays for small-scale producers in South Africa. Nat Biotechnol 22(4):379–380

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  54. Bennett R, Ismael Y, Kambhampati U, Morse S (2004) Economic impact of genetically modified cotton in India. AgBioforum 7(3):96–100

    Google Scholar 

  55. IMRB (2006) Socio-economic benefits of Bollgard and product satisfaction (in India). IMRB International, Mumbai, India

    Google Scholar 

  56. IMRB (2007) Socio-economic benefits of Bollgard and product satisfaction (in India). IMRB International, Mumbai, India

    Google Scholar 

  57. Monsanto Brazil (2008) Farm survey of conventional and Bt cotton growers in Brazil 2007. (Unpublished)

    Google Scholar 

  58. Zambrano P et al (2009) Insect resistant cotton in Columbia: impact on farmers. In: Paper presented to the 13th ICABR conference, Ravello, Italy, June 2009

    Google Scholar 

  59. Vitale J et al (2006) The Bollgard II field trials in Burkina Faso: measuring how Bt cotton benefits West African farmers. In: Paper presented at the 10th ICABR Conference, Ravello, Italy

    Google Scholar 

  60. Vitale J et al (2008) The economic impact of 2nd generation Bt cotton in West Africa: empirical evidence from Burkino Faso. Int J Biotechnol 10(2/3):167–183

    Article  Google Scholar 

  61. Rice M (2004) Transgenic rootworm corn: assessing potential agronomic, economic and environmental benefits. Plant Health Progress 10, `094/php-2001-0301-01-RV

    Google Scholar 

  62. Alston J et al (2003) An ex-ante analysis of the benefits from adoption of corn rootworm resistant, transgenic corn technology. AgBioforum 5(3), Article 1

    Google Scholar 

  63. Manjunath T (2008) Bt cotton in India: remarkable adoption and benefits, Foundation for Biotech Awareness and Education, India. www.fbae.org

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Agricultural Economist, PG Economics Ltd, Dorset, UK

    Dr. Graham Brookes

Authors
  1. Dr. Graham Brookes
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Graham Brookes .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. RAMTECH LIMITED, Larkspur, CA, USA

    Robert A. Meyers

Appendix 1: Argentine Second Crop Soybeans

Appendix 1: Argentine Second Crop Soybeans

Year

Second crop area (million hectares)

Increase in income linked to GM HT system (million $)

Additional production (million tons)

1996

0.45

Negligible

Negligible

1997

0.65

25.4

0.3

1998

0.8

43.8

0.9

1999

1.4

116.6

2.3

2000

1.6

144.2

2.7

2001

2.4

272.8

5.7

2002

2.7

372.6

6.9

2003

2.8

416.1

7.7

2004

3.0

678.1

6.9

2005

2.3

526.7

6.3

2006

3.2

698.9

11.2

2007

4.9

1,133.6

9.88

2008

3.4

764.6

9.62

  1. Additional gross margin based on data from Grupo CEO

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2012 Springer Science+Business Media, LLC

About this entry

Cite this entry

Brookes, G. (2012). Global Economic Impact of Transgenic/Biotech Crops (1996–2008). In: Meyers, R.A. (eds) Encyclopedia of Sustainability Science and Technology. Springer, New York, NY. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4419-0851-3_166

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation