IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/agisys/v127y2014icp150-160.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Modelling ex-ante the economic and environmental impacts of Genetically Modified Herbicide Tolerant maize cultivation in Europe

Author

Listed:
  • Tillie, Pascal
  • Dillen, Koen
  • Rodríguez-Cerezo, Emilio

Abstract

Genetically Modified Herbicide Tolerant (GMHT) maize tolerant to the broad-spectrum herbicide glyphosate is a possible addition to the weed control toolbox of European farmers. We modelled ex-ante the economic and environmental changes associated with the adoption of GMHT maize in Europe. A dataset from a survey of maize farmers conducted in seven European countries was used to construct a baseline of current herbicide use and costs in maize cultivation. A stochastic partial budgeting model was used to simulate the impacts of adoption of GMHT maize on farmers’ gross margin. We built a first scenario representing the initial years of introduction of the technology (low, fixed technology fee and an herbicide program for GMHT maize based exclusively on glyphosate). Assuming that all farmers who benefit from the technology will adopt GMHT maize, the model predicts very high adoption rates for all seven countries (60–98% of maize farmers depending on the country). We also calculated the Environmental Impact Quotient Index (EIQ) associated with herbicide use when switching to GMHT maize. In ES, PT and CZ, countries with a high baseline of herbicide use in maize, the majority of adopting farmers (60–79%) will also experience reductions in EIQ, realising the economic and environmental potential of the technology. In contrast, for countries such as FR, DE and HU, only a fraction (19–28%) of adopting farmers experiences a decreased EIQ. In this situation, a purely economic-driven adoption may result in increased EIQ for many adopting farmers. We also explored the effects of additional scenarios introducing more complex herbicide programmes for delaying weed resistance and changes in the technology fee of GMHT seeds. In these scenarios adoption levels decrease but the technology is still economically attractive for a large share of farmers (14–86%), showing that a sustainable use of the technology to lower the risk of weed resistance development is not in contradiction with its economic attractiveness. These scenarios do not change significantly the proportion of adopting farmers for which the EIQ decreases. The pattern of two groups of countries in terms of potential environmental effects remains and calls for a better identification of the subset of farmers with economic and environmental potential for the technology. Finally, our results confirm that farmers are the main economic beneficiary of GMHT maize introduction while the technology provider is not able to capture all the benefits generated by the technology due to heterogeneity within the farmer population.

Suggested Citation

  • Tillie, Pascal & Dillen, Koen & Rodríguez-Cerezo, Emilio, 2014. "Modelling ex-ante the economic and environmental impacts of Genetically Modified Herbicide Tolerant maize cultivation in Europe," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 127(C), pages 150-160.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:agisys:v:127:y:2014:i:c:p:150-160
    DOI: 10.1016/j.agsy.2014.03.004
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0308521X14000341
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.agsy.2014.03.004?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Beckmann, Volker & Soregaroli, Claudio & Wesseler, Justus, 2010. "Ex-ante regulation and ex-post liability under uncertainty and irreversibility: governing the coexistence of GM crops," Economics - The Open-Access, Open-Assessment E-Journal (2007-2020), Kiel Institute for the World Economy (IfW Kiel), vol. 4, pages 1-33.
    2. Michele C. Marra & Nicholas E. Piggott, 2006. "The Value of Non-Pecuniary Characteristics of Crop Biotechnologies: A New Look at the Evidence," Natural Resource Management and Policy, in: Richard E. Just & Julian M. Alston & David Zilberman (ed.), Regulating Agricultural Biotechnology: Economics and Policy, chapter 0, pages 145-177, Springer.
    3. Matty Demont & Koen Dillen & Erik Mathijs & Eric Tollens, 2007. "GM Crops in Europe: How Much Value and for Whom? Les cultures génétiquement modifiées en Europe : quels avantages et pour qui? Genetisch veränderte Feldfrüchte in Europa: Welcher Wert und für wen?," EuroChoices, The Agricultural Economics Society, vol. 6(3), pages 46-53, December.
    4. Guanming Shi & Jean-Paul Chavas & Kyle Stiegert & Xiangyi Meng, 2012. "An analysis of bundle pricing: the case of biotech seeds," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 43, pages 125-139, November.
    5. Elizabeth Nolan & Paulo Santos, 2012. "The Contribution of Genetic Modification to Changes in Corn Yield in the United States," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 94(5), pages 1171-1188.
    6. Nillesen, Eleonora & Scatasta, Sara & Wesseler, Justus, 2006. "Bt and Ht Corn versus Conventional Pesticide and Herbicide Use. Do Environmental Impacts Differ?," 2006 Annual Meeting, August 12-18, 2006, Queensland, Australia 25504, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    7. Demont, Matty & Daems, Wim & Dillen, Koen & Mathijs, Erik & Sausse, Christophe & Tollens, Eric, 2008. "Regulating coexistence in Europe: Beware of the domino-effect!," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 64(4), pages 683-689, February.
    8. Hareau, Guy G. & Mills, Bradford F. & Norton, George W., 2006. "The potential benefits of herbicide-resistant transgenic rice in Uruguay: Lessons for small developing countries," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 31(2), pages 162-179, April.
    9. Graef, F. & Stachow, U. & Werner, A. & Schutte, G., 2007. "Agricultural practice changes with cultivating genetically modified herbicide-tolerant oilseed rape," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 94(2), pages 111-118, May.
    10. Wesseler, Justus & Scatasta, Sara & Nillesen, Eleonora, 2007. "The maximum incremental social tolerable irreversible costs (MISTICs) and other benefits and costs of introducing transgenic maize in the EU-15," MPRA Paper 33229, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    11. Matty Demont & Marie Cerovska & Wim Daems & Koen Dillen & József Fogarasi & Erik Mathijs & František Muška & Josef Soukup & Eric Tollens, 2008. "Ex Ante Impact Assessment under Imperfect Information: Biotechnology in New Member States of the EU," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 59(3), pages 463-486, September.
    12. Matin Qaim, 2009. "The Economics of Genetically Modified Crops," Annual Review of Resource Economics, Annual Reviews, vol. 1(1), pages 665-694, September.
    13. José Benjamin Falck-Zepeda & Greg Traxler & Robert G. Nelson, 2000. "Surplus Distribution from the Introduction of a Biotechnology Innovation," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 82(2), pages 360-369.
    14. Mingxia Zhang, 1997. "The Effects of Imperfect Competition on the Size and Distribution of Research Benefits," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 79(4), pages 1252-1265.
    15. Areal, Francisco J. & Riesgo, Laura & Gómez-Barbero, Manuel & Rodríguez-Cerezo, Emilio, 2012. "Consequences of a coexistence policy on the adoption of GMHT crops in the European Union," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(4), pages 401-411.
    16. Koen Dillen & Matty Demont & Eric Tollens, 2008. "European Sugar Policy Reform and Agricultural Innovation," Canadian Journal of Agricultural Economics/Revue canadienne d'agroeconomie, Canadian Agricultural Economics Society/Societe canadienne d'agroeconomie, vol. 56(4), pages 533-553, December.
    17. Richard E. Just & Julian M. Alston & David Zilberman (ed.), 2006. "Regulating Agricultural Biotechnology: Economics and Policy," Natural Resource Management and Policy, Springer, number 978-0-387-36953-2, December.
    18. Sylvie Bonny, 2011. "Herbicide-tolerant Transgenic Soybean over 15 Years of Cultivation: Pesticide Use, Weed Resistance, and Some Economic Issues. The Case of the USA," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 3(9), pages 1-21, August.
    19. Matin Qaim & Greg Traxler, 2005. "Roundup Ready soybeans in Argentina: farm level and aggregate welfare effects," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 32(1), pages 73-86, January.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Marek Domin & Franciszek Kluza & Dariusz Góral & Sybilla Nazarewicz & Katarzyna Kozłowicz & Marek Szmigielski & Beata Ślaska-Grzywna, 2019. "Germination Energy and Capacity of Maize Seeds Following Low-Temperature Short Storage," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(1), pages 1-10, December.
    2. Kudsk, Per & Jørgensen, Lise Nistrup & Ørum, Jens Erik, 2018. "Pesticide Load—A new Danish pesticide risk indicator with multiple applications," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 70(C), pages 384-393.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Areal, Francisco J. & Riesgo, Laura & Gómez-Barbero, Manuel & Rodríguez-Cerezo, Emilio, 2012. "Consequences of a coexistence policy on the adoption of GMHT crops in the European Union," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(4), pages 401-411.
    2. Demont, Matty & Dillen, Koen & Daems, Wim & Sausse, Christophe & Tollens, Eric & Mathijs, Erik, 2009. "On the proportionality of EU spatial ex ante coexistence regulations," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 34(6), pages 508-518, December.
    3. Rolf A. Groeneveld & Erik Ansink & Clemens C.M. Van de Wiel & Justus Wesseler, 2011. "Benefits and Costs of Biologically Contained Genetically Modified Tomatoes and Eggplants in Italy and Spain," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 3(8), pages 1-17, August.
    4. Dillen, Koen & Demont, Matty & Tollens, Eric, 2008. "Modelling heterogeneity to estimate the ex ante value of biotechnology innovations," 2008 International Congress, August 26-29, 2008, Ghent, Belgium 43945, European Association of Agricultural Economists.
    5. Groeneveld, Rolf A. & Wesseler, Justus & Berentsen, Paul B.M., 2013. "Dominos in the dairy: An analysis of transgenic maize in Dutch dairy farming," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 86(C), pages 107-116.
    6. Jonas Kathage & Manuel Gómez-Barbero & Emilio Rodríguez-Cerezo, 2016. "Framework for assessing the socio-economic impacts of Bt maize cultivation," JRC Research Reports JRC103197, Joint Research Centre (Seville site).
    7. Matty Demont & Marie Cerovska & Wim Daems & Koen Dillen & József Fogarasi & Erik Mathijs & František Muška & Josef Soukup & Eric Tollens, 2008. "Ex Ante Impact Assessment under Imperfect Information: Biotechnology in New Member States of the EU," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 59(3), pages 463-486, September.
    8. Dillen, Koen & Tollens, Eric & Wesseler, Justus, 2010. "The Barroso Proposal Of Nationalizing Gmapproval: A Look At Ht Sugar Beets Under Changed European Sugar Policy," 14th ICABR Conference, June 16-18, 2010, Ravello, Italy 188086, International Consortium on Applied Bioeconomy Research (ICABR).
    9. GianCarlo Moschini, 2008. "Biotechnology and the development of food markets: retrospect and prospects," European Review of Agricultural Economics, Foundation for the European Review of Agricultural Economics, vol. 35(3), pages 331-355, September.
    10. Breustedt, Gunnar & Latacz-Lohmann, Uwe & Müller-Scheeßel, Jörg, 2013. "Impact of alternative information requirements on the coexistence of genetically modified (GM) and non-GM oilseed rape in the EU," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 93(C), pages 104-115.
    11. Federico Ciliberto & GianCarlo Moschini & Edward D. Perry, 2019. "Valuing product innovation: genetically engineered varieties in US corn and soybeans," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 50(3), pages 615-644, September.
    12. Hareau, Guy G. & Mills, Bradford F. & Norton, George W., 2006. "The potential benefits of herbicide-resistant transgenic rice in Uruguay: Lessons for small developing countries," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 31(2), pages 162-179, April.
    13. Wesseler, Justus, 2014. "Biotechnologies and agrifood strategies: opportunities, threats and economic implications," Bio-based and Applied Economics Journal, Italian Association of Agricultural and Applied Economics (AIEAA), vol. 3(3), pages 1-18, December.
    14. Gray, Emily & Ancev, Tihomir & Drynan, Ross, 2011. "Coexistence of GM and non-GM crops with endogenously determined separation," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(12), pages 2486-2493.
    15. Hareau, Guy Gaston & Mills, Bradford F. & Norton, George W., 2005. "Arroz Transgénico en Uruguay: un modelo de simulación para estimar los beneficios económicos potenciales," Serie Tecnica 121683, Instituto Nacional de Investigacion Agropecuaria (INIA).
    16. Skevas, Theodoros & Fevereiro, Pedro & Wesseler, Justus, 2010. "Coexistence regulations and agriculture production: A case study of five Bt maize producers in Portugal," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(12), pages 2402-2408, October.
    17. Klara Fischer & Camilla Eriksson, 2016. "Social Science Studies on European and African Agriculture Compared: Bringing Together Different Strands of Academic Debate on GM Crops," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 8(9), pages 1-17, August.
    18. Frisvold, George & Reeves, Jeanne, 2015. "Genetically Modified Crops: International Trade And Trade Policy Effects," International Journal of Food and Agricultural Economics (IJFAEC), Alanya Alaaddin Keykubat University, Department of Economics and Finance, vol. 3(2), pages 1-13, April.
    19. Galli, Fabrizio & Naseem, Anwar & Singla, Rohit, 2012. "Welfare Effects of Herbicide-Tolerant Rice Adoption in Brazil," 2012 Conference, August 18-24, 2012, Foz do Iguacu, Brazil 126886, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    20. Fernandez-Cornejo, Jorge & Livingston, Michael J. & Mitchell, Lorraine & Wechsler, Seth, 2014. "Genetically Engineered Crops in the United States," Economic Research Report 164263, United States Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:agisys:v:127:y:2014:i:c:p:150-160. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/agsy .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.