IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v7y2015i7p8598-8620d51994.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Social Impacts of GM Crops in Agriculture: A Systematic Literature Review

Author

Listed:
  • Klara Fischer

    (Department of Urban and Rural Development, Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences, P.O. Box 7012, SE-750 07 Uppsala, Sweden)

  • Elisabeth Ekener-Petersen

    (Department of Environmental Strategies Research, KTH–Royal Institute of Technology, Drottning Kristinas vag 30 III, SE-100 44 Stockholm, Sweden)

  • Lotta Rydhmer

    (Department of Animal Breeding and Genetics, Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences, P.O. Box 7023, SE-75007 Uppsala, Sweden)

  • Karin Edvardsson Björnberg

    (Division of Philosophy, KTH Royal Institute of Technology, Brinellvagen 32, SE-100 44 Stockholm, Sweden)

Abstract

It has recently been argued that the fragmented knowledge on the social impacts of genetically modified (GM) crops is contributing to the polarised debate on the matter. This paper addresses this issue by systematically reviewing 99 peer-reviewed journal articles published since 2004 on the social impacts of GM crops in agriculture; summarising current knowledge, and identifying research gaps. Economic impact studies currently dominate the literature and mainly report that GM crops provide economic benefits for farmers. Other social impacts are less well studied, but present a more complex picture. Studies on access to and benefits of GM crops show that these vary significantly depending on the political and regulatory setting. Substantial evidence indicates that intellectual property rights (IPR) and the private industry’s dominance limit the access and utility of available GM crops to many farmers. Wellbeing is frequently discussed in the literature, but rarely investigated empirically. Existing evidence is contradictory and inconclusive. Impact studies from the Global North are virtually non-existent. Moreover, two-thirds of publications are based on previously published empirical evidence, indicating a need for new empirical investigations into the social impacts of GM crops in agriculture.

Suggested Citation

  • 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.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:7:y:2015:i:7:p:8598-8620:d:51994
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/7/7/8598/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/7/7/8598/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Krishna, Vijesh V. & Qaim, Matin, 2007. "Potential Impacts of Bt Eggplant on Economic Surplus and Farmers' Health in India," 2007 Annual Meeting, July 29-August 1, 2007, Portland, Oregon 9909, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
    2. Anand, Sudhir & Sen, Amartya, 2000. "Human Development and Economic Sustainability," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 28(12), pages 2029-2049, December.
    3. Sanglestsawai, Santi & Rejesus, Roderick M. & Yorobe, Jose M., 2014. "Do lower yielding farmers benefit from Bt corn? Evidence from instrumental variable quantile regressions," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 44(C), pages 285-296.
    4. Richard Bennett & Stephen Morse & Yousouf Ismael, 2006. "The economic impact of genetically modified cotton on South African smallholders: Yield, profit and health effects," Journal of Development Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 42(4), pages 662-677.
    5. Elizabeth Fitting, 2006. "Importing Corn, Exporting Labor: The Neoliberal Corn Regime, GMOs, and the Erosion of Mexican Biodiversity," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 23(1), pages 15-26, March.
    6. Vijesh V. Krishna & Matin Qaim, 2008. "Potential impacts of Bt eggplant on economic surplus and farmers' health in India," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 38(2), pages 167-180, March.
    7. Bhavani Shankar & Richard Bennett & Stephen Morse, 2008. "Production risk, pesticide use and GM crop technology in South Africa," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 40(19), pages 2489-2500.
    8. Kiresur, V.R. & Ichangi, Manjunath, 2011. "Socio-Economic Impact of Bt Cotton — A Case Study of Karnataka," Agricultural Economics Research Review, Agricultural Economics Research Association (India), vol. 24(1), June.
    9. Soleri, Daniela & Cleveland, David A. & Glasgow, Garrett & Sweeney, Stuart H. & Cuevas, Flavio Aragón & Fuentes, Mario R. & Ríos L., Humberto, 2008. "Testing assumptions underlying economic research on transgenic food crops for Third World farmers: Evidence from Cuba, Guatemala and Mexico," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 67(4), pages 667-682, November.
    10. Sheila Jasanoff, 2000. "Between risk and precaution -- reassessing the future of GM crops," Journal of Risk Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 3(3), pages 277-282, July.
    11. Christopher J. M. Whitty & Monty Jones & Alan Tollervey & Tim Wheeler, 2013. "Africa and Asia need a rational debate on GM crops," Nature, Nature, vol. 497(7447), pages 31-33, May.
    12. Vijesh Krishna & Matin Qaim & David Zilberman, 2016. "Transgenic crops, production risk and agrobiodiversity," European Review of Agricultural Economics, Oxford University Press and the European Agricultural and Applied Economics Publications Foundation, vol. 43(1), pages 137-164.
    13. Mauricio Bellon & Julien Berthaud, 2006. "Traditional Mexican Agricultural Systems and the Potential Impacts of Transgenic Varieties on Maize Diversity," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 23(1), pages 3-14, March.
    14. C. Gonsalves & D. R. Lee & D. Gonsalves, 2007. "The Adoption of genetically modified papaya in Hawaii and its implications for developing countries," Journal of Development Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 43(1), pages 177-191.
    15. Jeremy Hall & Stelvia Matos & Cooper Langford, 2008. "Social Exclusion and Transgenic Technology: The Case of Brazilian Agriculture," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 77(1), pages 45-63, January.
    16. van Zwanenberg, Patrick & Arza, Valeria, 2013. "Biotechnology and its configurations: GM cotton production on large and small farms in Argentina," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 35(2), pages 105-117.
    17. Wilhelm Klümper & Matin Qaim, 2014. "A Meta-Analysis of the Impacts of Genetically Modified Crops," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 9(11), pages 1-7, November.
    18. Stone, Glenn Davis, 2011. "Field versus Farm in Warangal: Bt Cotton, Higher Yields, and Larger Questions," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 39(3), pages 387-398, March.
    19. Maria Lusser & Terri Raney & Pascal Tilli & Koen Dillen & Emilio Rodríguez Cerezo, 2013. "International workshop on socio-economic impacts of genetically modified crops co-organised by JRC-IPTS and FAO," JRC Research Reports JRC69363, Joint Research Centre.
    20. Harald Witt & Rajeev Patel & Matthew Schnurr, 2006. "Can the Poor Help GM Crops? Technology, representation & cotton in the Makhathini flats, South Africa," Review of African Political Economy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 33(109), pages 497-513, September.
    21. Matin Qaim, 2009. "The Economics of Genetically Modified Crops," Annual Review of Resource Economics, Annual Reviews, vol. 1(1), pages 665-694, September.
    22. Elias Andersson & Gun Lidestav, 2014. "Gendered Resource Access and Utilisation in Swedish Family Farming," Land, MDPI, vol. 3(1), pages 1-16, February.
    23. Arjunan Subramanian & Matin Qaim, 2010. "The Impact of Bt Cotton on Poor Households in Rural India," Journal of Development Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 46(2), pages 295-311.
    24. 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.
    25. Spielman, David J. & Pandya-Lorch, Rajul, 2009. "Millions fed: Proven successes in agricultural development," IFPRI books, International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI), number Millions Fed Book: 2009.
    26. Beate Littig & Erich Griessler, 2005. "Social sustainability: a catchword between political pragmatism and social theory," International Journal of Sustainable Development, Inderscience Enterprises Ltd, vol. 8(1/2), pages 65-79.
    27. Maria Mutuc & Roderick M. Rejesus & Jose M. Yorobe, Jr., 2013. "Which farmers benefit the most from Bt corn adoption? Estimating heterogeneity effects in the Philippines," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 44(2), pages 231-239, March.
    28. Subramanian, Arjunan & Qaim, Matin, 2009. "Village-wide Effects of Agricultural Biotechnology: The Case of Bt Cotton in India," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 37(1), pages 256-267, January.
    29. 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, vol. 3(5), pages 1-20, May.
    30. Byerlee, Derek, 1996. "Modern varieties, productivity, and sustainability: Recent experience and emerging challenges," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 24(4), pages 697-718, April.
    31. 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.
    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. 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.
    2. 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.
    3. Amaranta Herrero & Fern Wickson & Rosa Binimelis, 2015. "Seeing GMOs from a Systems Perspective: The Need for Comparative Cartographies of Agri/Cultures for Sustainability Assessment," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 7(8), pages 1-24, August.
    4. Rosa Binimelis & Anne Ingeborg Myhr, 2016. "Inclusion and Implementation of Socio-Economic Considerations in GMO Regulations: Needs and Recommendations," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 8(1), pages 1-24, January.
    5. Hidemichi Fujii & Kentaro Yoshida & Ken Sugimura, 2016. "Research and Development Strategy in Biological Technologies: A Patent Data Analysis of Japanese Manufacturing Firms," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 8(4), pages 1-15, April.
    6. Sigfrid Kjeldaas & Tim Dassler & Trine Antonsen & Odd-Gunnar Wikmark & Anne I. Myhr, 2023. "With great power comes great responsibility: why ‘safe enough’ is not good enough in debates on new gene technologies," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 40(2), pages 533-545, June.
    7. Lillemets, Jüri & Fertő, Imre & Viira, Ants-Hannes, 2022. "The socioeconomic impacts of the CAP: Systematic literature review," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 114(C).
    8. Christina-Ioanna Papadopoulou & Efstratios Loizou & Fotios Chatzitheodoridis, 2022. "Priorities in Bioeconomy Strategies: A Systematic Literature Review," Energies, MDPI, vol. 15(19), pages 1-15, October.
    9. Van Acker, Rene & Cici, S. Zahra H. & Lohuis, Michael & Ryan, Camille & Sachs, Eric, 2015. "Gaining Societal Acceptance of Biotechnology: The Case for Societal Engagement," GMCC-15: Seventh GMCC, November 17-20, 2015, Amsterdam, the Netherlands 211639, International Conference on Coexistence between Genetically Modified (GM) and non-GM based Agricultural Supply Chains (GMCC).
    10. Sigfrid Kjeldaas & Trine Antonsen & Sarah Hartley & Anne Ingeborg Myhr, 2021. "Public Consultation on Proposed Revisions to Norway’s Gene Technology Act: An Analysis of the Consultation Framing, Stakeholder Concerns, and the Integration of Non-Safety Considerations," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(14), pages 1-25, 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. 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.
    2. Gouse, Marnus & Sengupta, Debdatta & Zambrano, Patricia & Zepeda, José Falck, 2016. "Genetically Modified Maize: Less Drudgery for Her, More Maize for Him? Evidence from Smallholder Maize Farmers in South Africa," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 83(C), pages 27-38.
    3. Fischer, Klara, 2016. "Why new crop technology is not scale-neutral—A critique of the expectations for a crop-based African Green Revolution," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(6), pages 1185-1194.
    4. Kouser, Shahzad & Qaim, Matin, 2011. "Impact of Bt cotton on pesticide poisoning in smallholder agriculture: A panel data analysis," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(11), pages 2105-2113, September.
    5. Kouser, Shahzad & Qaim, Matin, 2012. "Valuing financial, health and environmental benefits of Bt cotton in Pakistan," 2012 Conference, August 18-24, 2012, Foz do Iguacu, Brazil 126544, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    6. Birthal, Pratap S., 2013. "Application of Frontier Technologies for Agricultural Development," Indian Journal of Agricultural Economics, Indian Society of Agricultural Economics, vol. 68(1), pages 1-19.
    7. Krishna, Vijesh V. & Qaim, Matin, 2011. "Pesticide Reduction Sustainability of Bt Technology in India," 2011 International Congress, August 30-September 2, 2011, Zurich, Switzerland 114696, European Association of Agricultural Economists.
    8. Smyth, Stuart J. & Falck-Zepeda, Jose & Ludlow, Karinne, 2016. "The Costs of Regulatory Delays for Genetically Modified Crops," Estey Centre Journal of International Law and Trade Policy, Estey Centre for Law and Economics in International Trade, vol. 17(2), pages 1-23, December.
    9. Krishna, Vijesh V. & Qaim, Matin, 2012. "Bt cotton and sustainability of pesticide reductions in India," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 107(C), pages 47-55.
    10. Connor, Lawson & Rejesus, Roderick M., "undated". "Labor Savings and Time Allocation Shifts from the Adoption of Pesticidal GM Crops in the Philippines," 2017 Annual Meeting, July 30-August 1, Chicago, Illinois 259967, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    11. Katharina Najork & Jonathan Friedrich & Markus Keck, 2022. "Bt cotton, pink bollworm, and the political economy of sociobiological obsolescence: insights from Telangana, India," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 39(3), pages 1007-1026, September.
    12. 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.
    13. Ragasa, Catherine, 2012. "Gender and Institutional Dimensions of Agricultural Technology Adoption: A Review of Literature and Synthesis of 35 Case Studies," 2012 Conference, August 18-24, 2012, Foz do Iguacu, Brazil 126747, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    14. Raney, Terri & Matuschke, Ira, 2010. "Genetically Modified Crops In Developing Countries: Back To The Future," 14th ICABR Conference, June 16-18, 2010, Ravello, Italy 188106, International Consortium on Applied Bioeconomy Research (ICABR).
    15. Katharina Najork & Susheel Gadela & Padmarao Nadiminti & Sreeramulu Gosikonda & Raghava Reddy & Ejnavarzala Haribabu & Markus Keck, 2021. "The Return of Pink Bollworm in India’s Bt Cotton Fields: Livelihood Vulnerabilities of Farming Households in Karimnagar District," Progress in Development Studies, , vol. 21(1), pages 68-85, January.
    16. Evita Pangaribowo & Nicolas Gerber & Pascal Tillie, 2013. "Assessing the FNS impacts of technological and institutional innovations and future innovation trends," FOODSECURE Working papers 11, LEI Wageningen UR.
    17. 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.
    18. Sarthak Gaurav & Srijit Mishra, 2012. "To Bt or not to Bt? Risk and uncertainty considerations in technology assessment," Indira Gandhi Institute of Development Research, Mumbai Working Papers 2012-001, Indira Gandhi Institute of Development Research, Mumbai, India.
    19. David Zilberman & Tim G. Holland & Itai Trilnick, 2018. "Agricultural GMOs—What We Know and Where Scientists Disagree," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(5), pages 1-19, May.
    20. Bequet, Ludovic, 2020. "Biotech Crops, Input Use and Landslides Case Study of Herbicide Tolerant Corn in the Philippine Highlands," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 177(C).

    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:7:y:2015:i:7:p:8598-8620:d:51994. 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.