IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ags/eptddp/16065.html

To Reach The Poor: Results From The Isnar-Ifpri Next Harvest Study On Genetically Modified Crops, Public Research, And Policy Implications

Author

Listed:
  • Atanassov, Atannas
  • Bahieldin, Ahmed
  • Brink, Johan
  • Burachik, Moises
  • Cohen, Joel I.
  • Dhawan, Vibha
  • Ebora, Reynaldo V.
  • Falck-Zepeda, Jose Benjamin
  • Herrera-Estrella, Luis
  • Komen, John
  • Low, Fee Chon
  • Omaliko, Emeka
  • Odhiambo, Benjamin
  • Quemada, Hector
  • Peng, Yufa
  • Sampaio, Maria Jose
  • Sithole-Niang, Idah
  • Sittenfeld, Ana
  • Smale, Melinda
  • Sutrisno
  • Valyasevi, Ruud
  • Zafar, Yusuf
  • Zambrano, Patricia

Abstract

Local farming communities throughout the world face productivity constraints, environmental concerns, and diverse nutritional needs. Developing countries address these challenges in a number of ways. One way is public research that produces genetically modified (GM) crops and recognize biotechnology as a part of the solution. To reach these communities, GM crops, after receiving biosafety agreement, must be approved for evaluation under local conditions. However, gaps between approvals in the developed and developing world grow larger, as the process of advancing GM crops in developing countries becomes increasingly difficult. In several countries, only insect resistant cotton has successfully moved from small, confined experimental trials to larger, open trials and to farms. By far, most GM crop approvals have been for commercial products that perform well under tropical conditions. However, complete information on public GM crop research in developing countries has not been assessed. Will policies and research institutions in the developing world stimulate the safe use of publicly funded GM food crops? The relatively few GM crops approved from public research, coupled with growing regulatory, biosafety capacity, trade, and political concerns, argue to the contrary. To tackle this issue, we identified and analyzed public research pipelines for GM crops among 16 developing countries and transition economies. Respondents reported 209 genetic transformation events1 for 46 different crops at the time when the survey was conducted. The pipelines demonstrate scientific progress among publicly funded crop research institutes in participating countries. Information and findings are presented for GM crops nearing final stages of selection. Additional details are provided for the types of genes and traits used, the breadth of genetic resources documented, implications for regulation, and the type of research partnerships employed. Regulations, GM crop approvals, choice of transgene, and policy implications are discussed as they affect this research. Based on these findings, recommendations are presented that would help sustain and increase efficiency of publicly supported research while meeting biosafety requirements. To do so, the study examines results concerning investments and choices made in research, capacity, and policy development for biotechnology. These indicate the risk and potential for GM technologies in developing countries. Policy makers, those funding biotechnology, and other stakeholders can use this information to prioritize investments, consider product advancement, and assess relative magnitude of potential risks, and benefits.

Suggested Citation

  • Atanassov, Atannas & Bahieldin, Ahmed & Brink, Johan & Burachik, Moises & Cohen, Joel I. & Dhawan, Vibha & Ebora, Reynaldo V. & Falck-Zepeda, Jose Benjamin & Herrera-Estrella, Luis & Komen, John & Low, 2004. "To Reach The Poor: Results From The Isnar-Ifpri Next Harvest Study On Genetically Modified Crops, Public Research, And Policy Implications," EPTD Discussion Papers 16065, CGIAR, International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI).
  • Handle: RePEc:ags:eptddp:16065
    DOI: 10.22004/ag.econ.16065
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/16065/files/ep040116.pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.22004/ag.econ.16065?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Paarlberg, Robert L., 2000. "Governing The Gm Crop Revolution: Policy Choices For Developing Countries," Food, Agriculture and the Environment Discussion Papers 16231, CGIAR, International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI).
    2. Paarlberg, Robert L., 2000. "Governing the GM crop revolution: policy choices for developing countries," 2020 vision discussion papers 33, International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI).
    3. 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.
    4. Paarlberg, Robert L., 2000. "Governing the GM crop revolution: policy choices for developing countries," 2020 vision briefs 68, International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI).
    5. Spielman, David J. & von Grebmer, Klaus, 2004. "Public-Private Partnerships In Agricultural Research: An Analysis Of Challenges Facing Industry And The Consultative Group On International Agricultural Research," EPTD Discussion Papers 16089, CGIAR, International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI).
    6. Paarlberg, Robert L., 2001. "The politics of precaution: genetically modified crops in developing countries," Food policy statements 35, International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI).
    7. Paarlberg, Robert L., 2001. "The Politics Of Precaution: Genetically Modified Crops In Developing Countries," Food Policy Statements 16587, CGIAR, International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI).
    8. T. C. Tso, 2004. "Agriculture of the future," Nature, Nature, vol. 428(6979), pages 215-217, March.
    9. DiMasi, Joseph A. & Hansen, Ronald W. & Grabowski, Henry G., 2003. "The price of innovation: new estimates of drug development costs," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 22(2), pages 151-185, March.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Atanassov, Atanas & Bahieldin, Ahmed & Brink, Johan & Burachik, Moisés & Cohen, Joel I. & Dhawan, Vibha & Ebora, Reynaldo V. & Falck-Zepeda, José Benjamin & Herrera-Estrella, Luis & Komen, John & Ch, 2004. "To reach the poor: Results from the ISNAR-IFPRI Next Harvest study on genetically modified crops, public research, and policy implications," EPTD discussion papers 116, International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI).
    2. Joel Cohen & John Komen & José Falck Zepeda, 2004. "National Agricultural Biotechnology Research Capacity in Developing Countries," Working Papers 04-14, Agricultural and Development Economics Division of the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO - ESA).
    3. Cohen, Joel & Komen, John & Zepeda, Jose Falck, "undated". "National agricultural biotechnology research capacity in developing countries," ESA Working Papers 23790, Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, Agricultural Development Economics Division (ESA).
    4. Watson, Robert & Crawford, Michael & Farley, Sara, 2003. "Strategic approaches to science and technology in development," Policy Research Working Paper Series 3026, The World Bank.
    5. Gal Hochman & Gordon C. Rausser & David Zilberman, 2011. "US versus EU Biotechnology Regulations and Comparative Advantage: Implications for Future Conflicts and Trade," Chapters, in: David Vogel & Johan Swinnen (ed.), Transatlantic Regulatory Cooperation, chapter 7, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    6. Roy, Sonali & Christy, Ralph D., 2005. "Agricultural Biotechnology Risks and Economic Development: A Call for a Public-Private Partnerships to Stimulate Investments into African Biotechnology Industries," Staff Papers 121113, Cornell University, Department of Applied Economics and Management.
    7. Michele Samorani & Manuel Laguna & Robert Kirk DeLisle & Daniel C. Weaver, 2011. "A Randomized Exhaustive Propositionalization Approach for Molecule Classification," INFORMS Journal on Computing, INFORMS, vol. 23(3), pages 331-345, August.
    8. Deepthi Kolady & William Lesser, 2012. "Genetically-engineered crops and their effects on varietal diversity: a case of Bt eggplant in India," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 29(1), pages 3-15, March.
    9. Hervouet, Adrien & Langinier, Corinne, . "Plant Breeders’ Rights, Patents, and Incentives to Innovate," Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Western Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 43(01).
    10. Bradley T. Shapiro, 2016. "Estimating the cost of strategic entry delay in pharmaceuticals: The case of Ambien CR," Quantitative Marketing and Economics (QME), Springer, vol. 14(3), pages 201-231, September.
    11. Maarten Ijzerman & Lotte Steuten, 2011. "Early assessment of medical technologies to inform product development and market access," Applied Health Economics and Health Policy, Springer, vol. 9(5), pages 331-347, September.
    12. David Wafula & Norman Clark, 2005. "Science and governance of modern biotechnology in Sub-Saharan Africa-the case of Uganda," Journal of International Development, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 17(5), pages 679-694.
    13. Roucan-Kane, Maud & Gray, Allan W., 2009. "The U.S. Seed Industry: An Exploration of Statistics Highlighting the Economic Activity of the U.S. Row Crop Seed Industry," Working papers 52549, Purdue University, Department of Agricultural Economics.
    14. Holger Patzelt & Dean A. Shepherd, 2009. "Strategic Entrepreneurship at Universities: Academic Entrepreneurs’ Assessment of Policy Programs," Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, , vol. 33(1), pages 319-340, January.
    15. Patzelt, Holger & zu Knyphausen-Aufseß, Dodo & Fischer, Heiko T., 2009. "Upper echelons and portfolio strategies of venture capital firms," Journal of Business Venturing, Elsevier, vol. 24(6), pages 558-572, November.
    16. De Groote, Hugo & Overholt, William & Ouma, James Okuro & Mugo, Stephen, 2003. "Assessing The Potential Impact Of Bt Maize In Kenya Using A Gis Based Model," 2003 Annual Meeting, August 16-22, 2003, Durban, South Africa 25854, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    17. Bardey, D. & Bommier, A. & Jullien, B., 2010. "Retail price regulation and innovation: Reference pricing in the pharmaceutical industry," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 29(2), pages 303-316, March.
    18. Hareau, Guy Gaston & Norton, George W. & Mills, Bradford F. & Peterson, Everett B., 2004. "Potential Benefits Of Transgenic Rice In Asia: A General Equilibrium Approach," 2004 Annual meeting, August 1-4, Denver, CO 20334, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
    19. Hong, Suckwon & Kim, Juram & Woo, Han-Gyun & Kim, Young-Choon & Lee, Changyong, 2022. "Screening ideas in the early stages of technology development: A word2vec and convolutional neural network approach," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 112(C).
    20. Marcela Miozzo & Lori DiVito & Panos Desyllas, 2011. "Cross-border acquisitions of science-based firms: Their effect on innovation in the acquired firm and the local science," DRUID Working Papers 11-17, DRUID, Copenhagen Business School, Department of Industrial Economics and Strategy/Aalborg University, Department of Business Studies.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:ags:eptddp:16065. 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: AgEcon Search (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/ifprius.html .

    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.