Crop Choice, Non-Target Pest Levels, Yield Loss and Their Effect on Insecticide Use in South Dakota
AbstractAgriculturally, South Dakota is a unique state possessing the highest rate of adoption for genetically modified crop varieties. In 2009 ninety-six percent of corn acres planted in South Dakota were genetically modified compared with eighty-five percent nationally (Economic Research Service). Additionally, South Dakota has seen a dramatic increase in the number of acres treated with insecticide over the past 20 years. These two situations taken together seem to be counterintuitive. Some genetically modified varieties, such as Bt corn, are equipped with genetic defenses so that they can protect the plant from target pests. Intuitively, one would expect to see a decrease in insecticide use as adoption of genetically modified varieties increase. Recent studies have found that there is a reduction in herbicides applied to herbicide tolerant varieties. Here in South Dakota, though, producers have expressed the opinion that the increase in insecticide use is the result of the emergence and spread of the soybean aphid in the state. This research seeks to address the underlying causes of the increase in insecticide use.
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 South Dakota State University, Department of Economics in its series Research Reports with number 201001.
Length: 2 Pages
Date of creation: Jul 2010
Date of revision:
Bt corn; GM crops; insecticide;
Other versions of this item:
- McDonald, Tia Michelle & Keating, Ariel Ruth & Fausti, Scott W. & Li, Jing & Lundgren, Jonathan G., 2010. "Crop Choice, Non-Target Pest Levels, Yield Loss and Their Effect on Insecticide Use in South Dakota," 2010 Annual Meeting, July 25-27, 2010, Denver, Colorado 61427, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
- Q1 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Agriculture
- Q2 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Renewable Resources and Conservation
- Q5 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Environmental Economics
This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:
You can help add them by filling out this form.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (David Davis).
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.