Pesticide Reduction Sustainability of Bt Technology in India
The primary focus of the study is the changes that occurred in the pesticide-use structure of cotton production sector of India, owing to the diffusion of Bacillus thuringiensis (Bt) technology. Studies from different countries show that transgenic Bt crops can reduce chemical pesticide use with positive economic, environmental, and health effects. However, most of these studies build on cross-section survey data, so that longer term effects are uncertain. Bt resistance and secondary pest outbreaks may potentially reduce or eliminate the benefits over time, especially in developing countries where refuge strategies are often not implemented. Here, data from a unique panel survey of cotton farmers, conducted in India between 2002 and 2008, show that the Bt pesticide reducing effect has been sustainable. In spite of an increase in pesticide sprays against secondary pests, total pesticide use has decreased significantly over time. Bt has also reduced pesticide applications by non-Bt farmers. These results mitigate the concern that Bt technology would soon become obsolete in small farmer environments. The survey data on actual pesticide use in farmers’ fields complement previous entomological research.
|Date of creation:||02 Sep 2011|
|Date of revision:|
|Contact details of provider:|| Web page: http://www.eaae.org|
More information through EDIRC
References listed on IDEAS
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
- 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 TN
9909, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
- 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, 03.
- Krishna, Vijesh V. & Qaim, Matin, 2007.
"Estimating the adoption of Bt eggplant in India: Who Benefits from public-private partnership?,"
Elsevier, vol. 32(5-6), pages 523-543.
- Krishna, Vijesh V. & Qaim, Matin, 2006. "Estimating the Adoption of Bt Eggplant in India: Who Benefits from Public-Private Partnership?," 2006 Annual Meeting, August 12-18, 2006, Queensland, Australia 25311, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
- Matin Qaim & Arjunan Subramanian & Gopal Naik & David Zilberman, 2006. "Adoption of Bt Cotton and Impact Variability: Insights from India," Review of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 28(1), pages 48-58.
- Matin Qaim, 2009. "The Economics of Genetically Modified Crops," Annual Review of Resource Economics, Annual Reviews, vol. 1(1), pages 665-694, 09.
- Benjamin Crost & Bhavani Shankar & Richard Bennett & Stephen Morse, 2007. "Bias from Farmer Self-Selection in Genetically Modified Crop Productivity Estimates: Evidence from Indian Data," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 58(1), pages 24-36, 02.
- 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.
- Akhter Ali & Awudu Abdulai, 2010. "The Adoption of Genetically Modified Cotton and Poverty Reduction in Pakistan," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 61(1), pages 175-192.
- Wossink, Ada & Denaux, Zulal S., 2006. "Environmental and cost efficiency of pesticide use in transgenic and conventional cotton production," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 90(1-3), pages 312-328, October.
- Pemsl, D. & Waibel, H., 2007. "Assessing the profitability of different crop protection strategies in cotton: Case study results from Shandong Province, China," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 95(1-3), pages 28-36, December.
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ags:eaae11:114696. 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: (AgEcon Search)
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 references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.
If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link 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 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.