IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/hal/journl/halshs-00324126.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Effectiveness and chemical pest control of Bt-cotton in the Yangtze River Valley, China

Author

Listed:
  • Naiyin Xu

    (RIIC - Research Institute of Industrial Crops - Jiangsu Academy of Agricultural Sciences)

  • Michel Fok

    (UPR SCA - Systèmes de Cultures Annuelles - Cirad - Centre de Coopération Internationale en Recherche Agronomique pour le Développement)

  • Lixin Bai

    (Institute of Crop Protection - Jiangsu Academy of Agriculture Sciences)

  • Zhiguo Zhou

    (Key Laboratory of Crop Growth Regulation of the Ministry of Agriculture - NAU - Nanjing Agricultural University)

Abstract

The sustainability of Bt-cotton in China, at least along Yellow River Valley, has been questioned, so this paper examines its effectiveness along Yangtze River Valley, where Bt-cotton is also widely sown, to determine what might be the factors beneath the limited or reduced effectiveness being observed. The analysis is based on the data collected for several years from many locations in the Yangtze River Valley Varietal Experiment Network to provide information on the varieties and their agronomic performance, on the control of their GM characteristic, on the expression of the Bt-gene and on chemical control practices against cotton pests.All varieties declared to be Bt-cotton were confirmed to have the Bt-gene, the expression of which was assessed in three ways: through the analysis of Bt-protein production and through indoor and outdoor bioassays. Gene expression varied substantially between varieties and between years for the few varieties which were tested in two subsequent years.The Bt-cotton varieties being sown cannot control bollworms totally even early in the growing season, so surviving larvae could inevitably be observed, and this led farmers (or professionals in charge of supplying technical assistance to farmers) to spray chemicals regardless of the real infestation level. This demonstrates behaviour aimed at eradication of the pests as bollworms seem to be treated chemically more often than is required and far earlier than necessary on the first two generations of H. armigera. The chemical control of the Bt-cotton in Yangtze River Valley hence is not optimal, thus farmers are paying high prices for varieties which are not totally resistant to bollworms and pest control costs are not reduced to the extent that they might expect, lowering the profitability of cotton production. Also chemical protection costs are not decreasing as those pests unaffected by the Bt-gene, mainly but not exclusively sucking ones are requiring more control. This is illustrative of a phenomenon of pest complex shift which deserves more attention in following up the Bt-cotton use.

Suggested Citation

  • Naiyin Xu & Michel Fok & Lixin Bai & Zhiguo Zhou, 2008. "Effectiveness and chemical pest control of Bt-cotton in the Yangtze River Valley, China," Post-Print halshs-00324126, HAL.
    • Handle: RePEc:hal:journl:halshs-00324126
    Note: View the original document on HAL open archive server: https://shs.hal.science/halshs-00324126
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://shs.hal.science/halshs-00324126/document
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Huang, Jikun & Hu, Ruifa & Rozelle, Scott & Qiao, Fangbin & Pray, Carl E., 2002. "Transgenic varieties and productivity of smallholder cotton farmers in China," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 46(3), pages 1-21.
    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. Shahzad Kouser & David J Spielman & Matin Qaim, 2019. "Transgenic cotton and farmers’ health in Pakistan," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 14(10), pages 1-19, October.
    2. 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).
    3. Horna, Daniela & Zambrano, Patricia & Falck-Zepeda, Jose Benjamin (ed.), 2013. "Socioeconomic considerations in biosafety decisionmaking: Methods and implementation," IFPRI books, International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI), number 978-0-89629-207-9, June.

    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. Cuong Le Van & Nguyen To The, 2019. "Farmers’ adoption of organic production," Asia-Pacific Journal of Regional Science, Springer, vol. 3(1), pages 33-59, February.
    2. Kipkoech, Anderson Kipruto & Schulthess, Fritz & Yabann, Wilson K. & Kipsat, Mary J. & Mithofer, Dagmar, 2010. "Measuring the economic value of redistributing parasitoids for the control of the maize stemborer Busseola fusca Fuller (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae) in Kenya," Journal of Cooperatives, NCERA-210, vol. 4(2), June.
    3. Jianhua Wang & May Chu & Yuting Ma, 2018. "Measuring Rice Farmer’s Pesticide Overuse Practice and the Determinants: A Statistical Analysis Based on Data Collected in Jiangsu and Anhui Provinces of China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(3), pages 1-17, March.
    4. Qiao, Fangbin, 2015. "Fifteen Years of Bt Cotton in China: The Economic Impact and its Dynamics," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 70(C), pages 177-185.
    5. Sadashivappa, Prakash & Qaim, Matin, 2009. "Effects of Bt Cotton in India During the First Five Years of Adoption," 2009 Conference, August 16-22, 2009, Beijing, China 49947, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    6. Mutuc, Maria Erlinda M. & Rejesus, Roderick M. & Pan, Suwen & Yorobe, Jose M., Jr., 2012. "Impact Assessment of Bt Corn Adoption in the Philippines," Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics, Southern Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 44(1), pages 1-19, February.
    7. Frisvold, George B. & Reeves, Jeanne M., 2008. "The costs and benefits of refuge requirements: The case of Bt cotton," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 65(1), pages 87-97, March.
    8. Hu, Ruifa & Pray, Carl & Huang, Jikun & Rozelle, Scott & Fan, Cunhui & Zhang, Caiping, 2009. "Reforming intellectual property rights and the Bt cotton seed industry in China: Who benefits from policy reform?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(5), pages 793-801, June.
    9. Ruiyao Ying & Li Zhou & Wuyang Hu & Dan Pan, 2017. "Agricultural technical education and agrochemical use by rice farmers in China," Agribusiness, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 33(4), pages 522-536, September.
    10. Sanglestsawai, Santi & Rodriguez, Divina Gracia P. & Rejesus, Roderick M. & Yorobe, Jose M., 2017. "Production Risk, Farmer Welfare, and Bt Corn in the Philippines," Agricultural and Resource Economics Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 46(3), pages 507-528, December.
    11. Elaine M. Liu, 2013. "Time to Change What to Sow: Risk Preferences and Technology Adoption Decisions of Cotton Farmers in China," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 95(4), pages 1386-1403, October.
    12. Kwikiriza, Norman & Katungi, Enid & Horna, Daniela, 2011. "Estimating the role of spatial varietal diversity on crop productivity within an abatement framework: The case of banana in Uganda," IFPRI discussion papers 01051, International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI).
    13. Suntornpithug, Pasu & Kalaitzandonakes, Nicholas G., 2009. "Understanding the Adoption of Cotton Biotechnologies in the US: Firm Level Evidence," Agricultural Economics Review, Greek Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 10(1), pages 1-17.
    14. Seixas, Renato & Silveira, José Maria, 2014. "More of Less isn’t Less of More: Assessing Environmental Impacts of Genetically Modified Seeds in Brazilian Agriculture," 2014 Annual Meeting, July 27-29, 2014, Minneapolis, Minnesota 170226, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    15. Solomon Asfaw & Dagmar Mithöfer & Hermann Waibel, 2009. "EU Food Safety Standards, Pesticide Use and Farm‐level Productivity: The Case of High‐value Crops in Kenya," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 60(3), pages 645-667, September.
    16. Abedullah & Ali, Haseeb & Kouser, Shahzad, 2012. "Pesticide or Wastewater, Which One is Bigger Culprit for Acute Health Symptoms among Vegetable Growers in Pakistan’s Punjab," 2012 Conference, August 18-24, 2012, Foz do Iguacu, Brazil 126598, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    17. Lan Tran & Theodoros Skevas & Laura McCann, 2023. "Measuring pesticide overuse and its determinants: Evidence from Vietnamese rice and fruit farms," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 67(3), pages 417-437, July.
    18. Kym Anderson & Ernesto Valenzuela & Lee Ann Jackson, 2007. "Recent and Prospective Adoption of Genetically Modified Cotton: A Global CGE Analysis of Economic Impacts," Centre for International Economic Studies Working Papers 2007-07, University of Adelaide, Centre for International Economic Studies.
    19. Iskid Jacquet & Jieyong Wang & Jianjun Zhang & Ke Wang & Sen Liang, 2022. "An Understanding of Education in Supporting Cotton Production: An Empirical Study in Benin, West Africa," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 12(6), pages 1-16, June.
    20. Michel Fok & Weili Liang & Guiyan Wang & Yuhong Wu, 2005. "Differentiated management of GM diffusion in China: Further hampering the self-sufficiency in cereal production?," Post-Print halshs-00008939, HAL.

    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:hal:journl:halshs-00324126. 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: CCSD (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/ .

    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.