Size And Distribution Of Market Benefits From Adopting Biotech Crops
AbstractThis study estimates the total benefit arising from the adoption of agricultural biotechnology in one year (1997) and its distribution among key stakeholders along the production and marketing chain. The analysis focuses on three biotech crops: herbicide-tolerant soybeans, insect-resistant (Bt) cotton, and herbicide-tolerant cotton. Adoption of these crops resulted in estimated market benefits of $212.5-$300.7 million for Bt cotton, $231.8 million for herbicide-tolerant cotton, and $307.5 million for herbicide-tolerant soybeans. These benefits accounted for small shares of crop production value, ranging from 2 percent to 5 percent. U.S. farmers captured a much larger share (about a third) of the benefits for Bt cotton than with herbicide-tolerant soybeans (20 percent) and herbicide-tolerant cotton (4 percent). Innovators' share ranged from 30 percent for Bt cotton to 68 percent for herbicide-tolerant soybeans. For herbicide-tolerant cotton, U.S. consumers and the rest of the world (including both producers and consumers) received the bulk of the estimated benefits in 1997. Estimated benefits and their distribution depend on the specification of the analytical framework, supply and demand elasticity assumptions, the inclusion of market and nonmarket benefits, crops considered, and year-specific factors (such as weather and pest infestation levels).
Download InfoIf you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
Bibliographic InfoPaper provided by United States Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service in its series Technical Bulletins with number 33562.
Date of creation: 2003
Date of revision:
Contact details of provider:
Postal: 1400 Independence Ave.,SW, Mail Stop 1800, Washington, DC 20250-1800
Web page: http://www.ers.usda.gov/
More information through EDIRC
Agricultural biotechnology; distribution of benefits; Bt cotton; herbicide-tolerant cotton; herbicide-tolerant soybeans; Crop Production/Industries; Research and Development/Tech Change/Emerging Technologies;
You can help add them by filling out this form.
CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
- Lin, William W. & Somwaru, Agapi & Tuan, Francis C. & Huang, Jikun & Bai, Junfei, 2005. "Consumers' Willingness to Pay for Biotech Foods in China," 2005 Annual meeting, July 24-27, Providence, RI 19569, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
- Antoine Bouet & Guillaume Gruere, 2010.
"Refining opportunity cost estimates of not adopting GM cotton : An application in seven sub-saharan african countries,"
- Antoine Bou�t & Guillaume P. Gru�re, 2011. "Refining Opportunity Cost Estimates of Not Adopting GM Cotton: An Application in Seven Sub-Saharan African Countries," Applied Economic Perspectives and Policy, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 33(2), pages 260-279.
- Frisvold, George B. & Reeves, Jeanne M., 2008. "The costs and benefits of refuge requirements: The case of Bt cotton," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 65(1), pages 87-97, March.
- Robert Finger & Nadja El Benni & Timo Kaphengst & Clive Evans & Sophie Herbert & Bernard Lehmann & Stephen Morse & Nataliya Stupak, 2011. "A Meta Analysis on Farm-Level Costs and Benefits of GM Crops," Sustainability, MDPI, Open Access Journal, vol. 3(5), pages 743-762, May.
- Takeshima, Hiroyuki, 2011. "Distribution of welfare gains from GM cassava in Uganda across different population groups and market margins," African Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, African Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 6(1), March.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (AgEcon Search).
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.