IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v3y2011i6p847-874d12812.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Theory and Practice of Genetically Engineered Crops and Agricultural Sustainability

Author

Listed:
  • David E. Ervin

    (Environmental Science and Management Program, Portland State University, P.O. Box 751, Portland, OR 97207, USA
    Department of Economics, 1721 SW Broadway, Cramer Hall, Suite 241, Portland State University, Portland, OR 97201, USA
    Institute for Sustainable Solutions, P.O. Box 751, Portland State University, Portland, OR 97201, USA)

  • Leland L. Glenna

    (Department of Agricultural Economics and Rural Sociology, The Pennsylvania State University University Park, PA 16802, USA)

  • Raymond A. Jussaume

    (Department of Natural Resource Sciences, Room 107B Johnson Hall, Washington State University, Pullman, WA 99164, USA)

Abstract

The development of genetically engineered (GE) crops has focused predominantly on enhancing conventional pest control approaches. Scientific assessments show that these GE crops generally deliver significant economic and some environmental benefits over their conventional crop alternatives. However, emerging evidence indicates that current GE crops will not foster sustainable cropping systems unless the negative environmental and social feedback effects are properly addressed. Moreover, GE crop innovations that promote more sustainable agricultural systems will receive underinvestment by seed and chemical companies that must understandably focus on private returns for major crops. Opportunities to promote crops that convey multi-faceted benefits for the environment and the poor are foundational to a sustainable food system and should not be neglected because they also represent global public goods. In this paper, we develop a set of criteria that can guide the development of GE crops consistent with contemporary sustainable agriculture theory and practice. Based on those principles, we offer policy options and recommendations for reforming public and private R&D and commercialization processes to further the potential contributions of GE crops to sustainable agriculture. Two strategies that would help achieve this goal would be to restore the centrality of the public sector in agricultural R&D and to open the technology development process to more democratic participation by farmers and other stakeholders.

Suggested Citation

  • David E. Ervin & Leland L. Glenna & Raymond A. Jussaume, 2011. "The Theory and Practice of Genetically Engineered Crops and Agricultural Sustainability," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 3(6), pages 1-28, June.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:3:y:2011:i:6:p:847-874:d:12812
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/3/6/847/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/3/6/847/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Farley, Joshua & Costanza, Robert, 2010. "Payments for ecosystem services: From local to global," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(11), pages 2060-2068, September.
    2. Huffman, Wallace E. & Norton, George W. & Traxler, Greg & Frisvold, George B. & Foltz, Jeremy D., 2006. "Winners and Losers: Formula versus Competitive Funding of Agricultural Research," Choices: The Magazine of Food, Farm, and Resource Issues, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 21(4), pages 1-6.
    3. Jonathan Knight, 2003. "A dying breed," Nature, Nature, vol. 421(6923), pages 568-570, February.
    4. David E. Ervin & Rick Welsh, 2006. "Environmental Effects of Genetically Modified Crops: Differentiated Risk Assessment and Management," Natural Resource Management and Policy, in: Richard E. Just & Julian M. Alston & David Zilberman (ed.), Regulating Agricultural Biotechnology: Economics and Policy, chapter 0, pages 301-326, Springer.
    5. Schimmelpfennig, David E. & Pray, Carl E. & Brennan, Margaret F., 2004. "The impact of seed industry concentration on innovation: a study of US biotech market leaders," Agricultural Economics, Blackwell, vol. 30(2), pages 157-167, March.
    6. Leland Glenna & Raymond Jussaume & Julie Dawson, 2011. "How farmers matter in shaping agricultural technologies: social and structural characteristics of wheat growers and wheat varieties," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 28(2), pages 213-224, June.
    7. Zilberman, David & Hochman, Gal & Kaplan, Scott & Kim, Eunice, 2014. "Political Economy of Biofuel," Choices: The Magazine of Food, Farm, and Resource Issues, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 29(1), pages 1-6.
    8. Bryan Hubbell & Rick Welsh, 1998. "Transgenic crops: Engineering a more sustainable agriculture?," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 15(1), pages 43-56, March.
    9. Steven Buccola & David Ervin & Hui Yang, 2009. "Research Choice and Finance in University Bioscience," Southern Economic Journal, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 75(4), pages 1238-1255, April.
    10. Claassen, Roger & Hansen, LeRoy T. & Peters, Mark & Breneman, Vincent E. & Weinberg, Marca & Cattaneo, Andrea & Feather, Peter & Gadsby, Dwight M. & Hellerstein, Daniel & Hopkins, Jeffrey W. & Johnsto, 2001. "Agri-Environmental Policy at the Crossroads: Guideposts on a Changing Landscape," Agricultural Economic Reports 33983, United States Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service.
    11. Aerni, Philipp, 2009. "What is sustainable agriculture? Empirical evidence of diverging views in Switzerland and New Zealand," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 68(6), pages 1872-1882, April.
    12. Aerni, Philipp & Bernauer, Thomas, 2006. "Stakeholder attitudes toward GMOs in the Philippines, Mexico, and South Africa: The issue of public trust," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 34(3), pages 557-575, March.
    13. Hoppe, Robert A. & Korb, Penelope J. & O'Donoghue, Erik J. & Banker, David E., 2007. "Structure and Finances of U.S. Farms: Family Farm Report, 2007 Edition," Economic Information Bulletin 59032, United States Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service.
    14. 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.
    15. Naylor, Rosamond L. & Falcon, Walter P. & Goodman, Robert M. & Jahn, Molly M. & Sengooba, Theresa & Tefera, Hailu & Nelson, Rebecca J., 2004. "Biotechnology in the developing world: a case for increased investments in orphan crops," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 29(1), pages 15-44, February.
    16. Jack Kloppenburg & John Hendrickson & G. Stevenson, 1996. "Coming in to the foodshed," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 13(3), pages 33-42, June.
    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. Georgina Catacora-Vargas & Rosa Binimelis & Anne I. Myhr & Brian Wynne, 2018. "Socio-economic research on genetically modified crops: a study of the literature," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 35(2), pages 489-513, June.
    2. Peter Weißhuhn & Katharina Helming & Johanna Ferretti, 2018. "Research impact assessment in agriculture—A review of approaches and impact areas," Research Evaluation, Oxford University Press, vol. 27(1), pages 36-42.
    3. 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.
    4. Klara Fischer & Elisabeth Ekener-Petersen & Lotta Rydhmer & Karin Edvardsson Björnberg, 2015. "Social Impacts of GM Crops in Agriculture: A Systematic Literature Review," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 7(7), pages 1-23, July.

    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. Georgina Catacora-Vargas & Rosa Binimelis & Anne I. Myhr & Brian Wynne, 2018. "Socio-economic research on genetically modified crops: a study of the literature," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 35(2), pages 489-513, June.
    2. William Lacy, 2023. "Local food systems, citizen and public science, empowered communities, and democracy: hopes deserving to live," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 40(1), pages 1-17, March.
    3. Krishna, Vijesh V. & Zilberman, David & Qaim, Matin, 2009. "GM Technology Adoption, Production Risk and On-farm Varietal Diversity," 2009 Annual Meeting, July 26-28, 2009, Milwaukee, Wisconsin 49173, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    4. Reece, J. David & Haribabu, Ejnavarzala, 2007. "Genes to feed the world: The weakest link?," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 32(4), pages 459-479, August.
    5. Aerni, Philipp, 2013. "Do Private Standards encourage or hinder trade and innovation?," Papers 599, World Trade Institute.
    6. Philipp Aerni, 2011. "Do Political Attitudes Affect Consumer Choice? Evidence from a Large-Scale Field Study with Genetically Modified Bread in Switzerland," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 3(9), pages 1-18, September.
    7. Dawson, Ian K. & Hedley, Peter E. & Guarino, Luigi & Jaenicke, Hannah, 2009. "Does biotechnology have a role in the promotion of underutilised crops?," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 34(4), pages 319-328, August.
    8. Douglas H. Constance, 2023. "The doctors of agrifood studies," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 40(1), pages 31-43, March.
    9. Konduru, Srinivasa & Kalaitzandonakes, Nicholas G. & Magnier, Alexandre, 2009. "GMO Testing Strategies and Implications for Trade: A Game Theoretic Approach," 2009 Annual Meeting, July 26-28, 2009, Milwaukee, Wisconsin 49594, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    10. Robert Costanza & Shuang Liu, 2014. "Ecosystem Services and Environmental Governance: Comparing China and the U.S," Asia and the Pacific Policy Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 1(1), pages 160-170, January.
    11. Hongli Feng & Catherine L. Kling & Lyubov A. Kurkalova & Silvia Secchi & Philip W. Gassman, 2005. "The Conservation Reserve Program in the Presence of a Working Land Alternative: Implications for Environmental Quality, Program Participation, and Income Transfer," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 87(5), pages 1231-1238.
    12. Cicelin Rakotomahazo & Jacqueline Razanoelisoa & Nirinarisoa Lantoasinoro Ranivoarivelo & Gildas Georges Boleslas Todinanahary & Eulalie Ranaivoson & Mara Edouard Remanevy & Lalao Aigrette Ravaoarinor, 2021. "Community Perceptions of a Payment for Ecosystem Services Project in Southwest Madagascar: A Preliminary Study," Land, MDPI, vol. 10(6), pages 1-19, June.
    13. David Zilberman & Eunice Kim & Sam Kirschner & Scott Kaplan & Jeanne Reeves, 2013. "Technology and the future bioeconomy," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 44(s1), pages 95-102, November.
    14. Bardsley, Douglas K. & Bardsley, Annette M., 2014. "Organising for socio-ecological resilience: The roles of the mountain farmer cooperative Genossenschaft Gran Alpin in Graubünden, Switzerland," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 98(C), pages 11-21.
    15. Douglas K. Bardsley & Annette M. Bardsley & Marco Conedera, 2023. "The dispersion of climate change impacts from viticulture in Ticino, Switzerland," Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change, Springer, vol. 28(3), pages 1-25, March.
    16. Malerba, Daniele, 2020. "Poverty alleviation and local environmental degradation: An empirical analysis in Colombia," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 127(C).
    17. Aerni, Philipp, 2012. "Applying New Growth Theory To International Trade," Papers 415, World Trade Institute.
    18. Almuhanad Melhim & Erik J. O'Donoghue & C. Richard Shumway, 2009. "Do the Largest Firms Grow and Diversify the Fastest? The Case of U.S. Dairies," Review of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 31(2), pages 284-302, June.
    19. Veronesi, Marcella & Reutemann, Tim & Zabel, Astrid & Engel, Stefanie, 2015. "Designing REDD+ schemes when forest users are not forest landowners: Evidence from a survey-based experiment in Kenya," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 116(C), pages 46-57.
    20. Giannakas Konstantinos & Kalaitzandonakes Nicholas & Magnier Alexander & Mattas Konstadinos, 2011. "Economic Effects of Purity Standards in Biotech Labeling Laws," Journal of Agricultural & Food Industrial Organization, De Gruyter, vol. 9(1), pages 1-47, April.

    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:gam:jsusta:v:3:y:2011:i:6:p:847-874:d:12812. 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: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    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.