IDEAS home Printed from
   My bibliography  Save this article

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


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


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

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL:
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

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

    References listed on IDEAS

    1. 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.
    2. Matty Demont & Koen Dillen & Erik Mathijs & Eric Tollens, 2007. "GM Crops in Europe: How Much Value and for Whom?," EuroChoices, The Agricultural Economics Society, vol. 6(3), pages 46-53, December.
    3. 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.
    4. Matin Qaim, 2009. "The Economics of Genetically Modified Crops," Annual Review of Resource Economics, Annual Reviews, vol. 1(1), pages 665-694, September.
    5. 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.
    6. 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, Kiel Institute for the World Economy (IfW), vol. 4, pages 1-33.
    7. 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.
    8. 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.
    9. 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.
    10. 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.
    11. 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.
    12. 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, Open Access Journal, vol. 3(9), pages 1-21, August.
    13. 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.
    14. 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.
    15. Matty Demont & Marie Cerovska & Wim Daems & Koen Dillen & József Fogarasi & Erik Mathijs & Frantisek Muska & 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.
    16. 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.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)


    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.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Dana Niculescu). General contact details of provider: .

    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 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.

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

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.