Impact and Adoption of Proprietary Seed Technologies in Developing Countries

In den 1980er Jahren begannen viele Entwicklungsländer, ihre Saatgutmärkte zu liberalisieren. In der Folge verbreitete sich die Nutzung proprietärer Saatguttechnologien, einschließlich gentechnisch veränderter Pflanzen (GV-Pflanzen). Die Konsequenzen dieser Entwicklung für Kleinbauern werden seither kontrovers diskutiert. Kritiker befürchten, dass Privatisierung die Qualität von Saatgut sowie den kleinbäuerlichen Zugang zu ihm verschlechtert. Befürworter gehen davon aus, dass proprietäres Saatgut landwirtschaftliche Produktivität und Einkommen steigern kann. In dieser Dissertation untersuchen wir Auswirkungen proprietärer Saatguttechnologien auf Kleinbauern. Bacillus thuringiensis-Baumwolle (Bt-Baumwolle) in Indien und Hybridmais in Tansania. Der dritte Fokus dieser Arbeit liegt auf der Adoption proprietärer Saatguttechnologien, wo erneut auf Hybridmais in Tansania Bezug genommen wird. Infolge einer ausländischen Investition transferierte eine indische Saatgutfirma Mitte der 1990er Jahre die Bt-Technologie in mehrere Baumwollhybriden. Diese Hybriden wurden 2002 zum Anbau zugelassen. In den Folgejahren verwendeten auch zahlreiche andere Saatgutfirmen die Bt-Technologie in ihren Züchtungsprogrammen. 2011 bauten 7 Millionen Bauern auf etwa 90% der indischen Baumwollfläche Bt-Baumwolle an. Sie ist gegen Kapselbohrer, eine Gruppe wichtiger Schädlingsinsekten, resistent. Dadurch kann sie den Einsatz von Insektiziden verringern und außerdem den effektiven Ertrag erhöhen. Dies würde Kosteneinsparungen bei Pestiziden und höhere Erlöse nach sich ziehen, welche wiederum das landwirtschaftliche Einkommen steigern können. Wenn aber die Saatgutpreise von Bt-Baumwolle hoch und die Ertragseffekte klein sind, könnte der Einkommenseffekt gering oder negativ ausfallen. Zu den Auswirkungen von Bt-Baumwolle wurden viele Studien publiziert, aber Selektionsverzerrungen, die Entwicklungsdynamik der Effekte und über Einzelfelder hinausgehende Wirkungen wurden bisher nicht ausreichend berücksichtigt. Hier analysieren wir Paneldaten aus dem Zeitraum 2002-2008. Mithilfe von Fixed-Effects-Modellen reduzieren wir Selektionsverzerrungen und betrachten den zeitlichen Verlauf der Effekte. Unsere Schätzergebnisse zeigen, dass Bt im Zeitraum 2002-2008 den Ertrag um 24% und den Deckungsbeitrag um 50% erhöhte, sowie den Lebensstandard im Zeitraum 2006-2008 um 18%. Außerdem finden wir Hinweise für eine Steigerung der Ertrag- und Deckungsbeitragseffekte über den gesamten Zeitraum. Einen Rückgang des Insektizideinsatzes in Bt- und konventionellen Feldern, der wahrscheinlich ein Zeichen für eine starke Dezimierung von Kapselbohrern durch die Zunahme des Bt-Anbaus ist, können wir ebenfalls beobachten. Nach der Liberalisierung des Saatgutmarkts in Tansania Anfang der 1990er Jahre begannen mehrere private Saatgutfirmen mit dem Vertrieb von Hybridmais. Hybriden können zu einem Ertragszuwachs führen, der wiederum Erlös und Einkommen steigern kann. Auf der anderen Seite könnte der Einkommenseffekt negativ ausfallen, wenn Hybridsaatgut teurer als Nichthybridsaatgut ist. Zudem kann ein leistungsstarker Nichthybride durchaus auch einen höheren Ertrag erzielen als mancher Hybride. Es gibt zwar Studien, die Produktivitätseffekte von Hybridmais in Afrika evaluieren, aber in der Regel kontrollieren sie nicht Störfaktoren, wie etwa Bodenqualität oder Düngereinsatz. Darüber hinaus liegen kaum Untersuchungen zu modernen Maissorten in Afrika vor, die neben der Produktivität auch Effekte auf den Lebensstandard landwirtschaftlicher Haushalte berücksichtigen. Wir analysieren einen Querschnittsdatensatz aus dem Norden und Osten des Landes und finden einen Ertragszuwachs von 50-60% durch Hybriden. Dieser führt auch zu einem höheren Deckungsbeitrag. Die Zugewinne treten vor allem im Norden auf, wo sie außerdem den Lebensstandard um 15% erhöhen. Im Osten bringen Hybriden keine Vorteile hinsichtlich Ertrag, Deckungsbeitrag oder Lebensstandard. Da sich jedoch die Mehrheit der Anwender im Norden befindet, profitieren in einer überregionalen Betrachtung die meisten Hybridnutzer von der Technologie. Außerdem finden wir heraus, dass der Ertragseffekt von Hybriden unabhängig vom Einsatz von Mineraldünger, Bewässerung, Pestiziden oder Mischanbau ist. Allerdings ist die Adoptionsrate von Hybridmais in Tansania gering. Ein möglicher Grund könnte darin liegen, dass seine Verwendung durch bestimmte Faktoren, wie etwa einen mangelnden Informationstand der Bauern bezüglich der Hybriden, erschwert ist. In unserer Stichprobe bauen 31% der Bauern Hybridmais an. Im Norden sind Hybriden den meisten Bauern bekannt und 49% verwenden die Technologie, während im Osten nur 50% von der Technologie gehört haben und nur 12% sie nutzen. Mithilfe des Average Treatment Effect Framework errechnen wir, dass eine Informierung aller Bauern über Hybriden die Adoptionsrate auf 45% ansteigen lassen würde. Jedoch wären dann die meisten neuen Anwender im Osten, wo die Ertrags- und Deckungsbeitragseffekte von Hybriden klein sind. Im Norden, wo die Adoption einträglicher ist, haben bereits fast alle Bauern von Hybriden gehört. Außerdem zeigt sich, dass eine Verbreitung von Informationen über Hybriden durch Beratung und ländliche Netzwerke im Norden (nicht im Osten) stattfindet und daher als Resultat der dort höheren Nützlichkeit verstanden werden kann. Für diese Interpretation spricht auch, dass wir keine Hinweise finden, dass Risiko oder Mangel an Kreditzugang die Adoption verhindern. Daher erscheint es wahrscheinlich, dass Informationsflüsse und Adoptionsentscheidungen primär vom Nutzen, den Hybriden gegenüber Nichthybriden bieten, bestimmt werden. Wir kommen zu dem Schluss, dass der Privatsektor verbesserte Saatguttechnologien für Kleinbauern in Entwicklungsländern liefern kann und dass derartige Saatguttechnologien einschließlich GV-Pflanzen diesen Kleinbauern dienlich sein können. Daher sollte die Liberalisierung von Saatgutmärkten in Entwicklungsländern unterstützt werden. Außerdem müssen Regulierungen, welche die Verfügbarkeit von Saatguttechnologien einschränken, den möglichen Nutzen dieser Technologien für Landwirte berücksichtigen. Und schließlich sollten Politik und Geberorganisationen in ihren Förderentscheidungen die Beseitigung von Adoptionshemmnissen gegen die Schaffung verbesserter Technologien abwägen.In the 1980s, many developing countries began to liberalize their seed markets. This has led to an increased prevalence of proprietary seed technologies, including genetically modified (GM) crops. The implications for smallholder farmers are the subject of a controversial debate. Critics argue that privatization reduces the quality and affordability of seed for smallholder farmers. Proponents claim that proprietary seed technologies can raise agricultural productivity and incomes. In this dissertation we examine the impacts of proprietary seeds on smallholder farmers, with Bacillus thuringiensis (Bt) cotton in India and hybrid maize in Tanzania serving as two relevant cases. The third focus of this study relates to the adoption of proprietary seed technologies, again taking the case of hybrid maize in Tanzania. As a result of foreign investment, an Indian seed firm transferred the Bt technology into a small number of cotton hybrids in the mid-1990s. These hybrids were approved for cultivation in 2002. Over the ensuing decade, multiple other seed firms incorporated the Bt technology into their own breeding programs. By 2011 about 90% of the Indian cotton acreage was under Bt, grown by 7 million farmers. Bt cotton is resistant to bollworm, an important insect pest. Bt can thus reduce the need for chemical insecticides, and also increase effective yield. This would reduce pesticide cost and increase revenue, which might lead to higher farm income. But if Bt seed prices are high and productivity effects low, the income effect could be small or even negative. Many impact studies of Bt have been published, but selection bias, impact dynamics and possible consequences beyond the plot level were not sufficiently taken into account. Here, we analyze panel data covering the years 2002-2008. Using panel models with farm and household fixed effects, we control for selection bias and look at the impact dynamics over time. We estimate that Bt increased yield by 24% and profit by 50% in 2002-2008, and household living standard by 18% in 2006-2008. Furthermore, there are indications that yield and profit effects of Bt increased over time. We also observe that insecticide use on Bt and conventional plots decreased over time, probably a sign of large-scale suppression of bollworm populations by Bt. In Tanzania, seed market liberalization has attracted several private seed firms since the early 1990s that have been selling hybrid maize. Hybrids can confer a yield advantage over nonhybrids, raising revenue and farm income. On the other hand, if hybrid seeds are more expensive than nonhybrid seeds, the income effect might not be positive. In addition, a nonhybrid with superior germplasm could even achieve higher yield than some hybrids. While there are studies that evaluate the impact of hybrid maize on farm productivity in Africa, they usually do not control for potentially confounding factors, such as soil quality or fertilizer use. Moreover, hardly any study on modern maize varieties in Africa has looked beyond farm productivity to analyze impacts on household living standard. Analyzing cross-sectional household survey data collected in the north and east of Tanzania, we find that hybrids raise yield by 50-60%. As a result, hybrid adopters realize higher profits. The benefits mostly occur in the north, where hybrids also increase household living standard by 15%. In the east, hybrids confer no gain in yield, profit or living standard. But since the vast majority of hybrid adopters are located in the north, most adopters benefit from hybrids. We also find that the yield impact of hybrids is not dependent on the use of fertilizer, irrigation, pesticides, or intercropping. The adoption rate of hybrid maize in Tanzania is low and one possible reason is that nonadopters are constrained, for example by lack of information about hybrids. In our sample, 31% of farmers adopt hybrids. In the north, most farmers are aware of hybrids and 49% are adopters. In the east, only 50% are aware and 12% adopters of hybrids. Using the average treatment effect framework, we find that closure of the exposure gap would raise the overall adoption rate to 45%. However, the majority of new adopters would be in the east, where hybrids have a negligible impact on yield and profit. In the north, where the benefits of hybrid adoption are more significant, most farmers are already aware of hybrids. We also observe that information about hybrids spreads through extension and farmer networks in the north but not in the east. Aside from the information factor, we find no evidence for constraints related to risk or credit. Therefore it is likely that adoption and awareness of hybrids are primarily driven by the benefits hybrids offer relative to nonhybrids. We conclude that the private sector can deliver improved seed technologies to smallholder farmers in developing countries, and that improved seed technologies, including GM crops, can benefit these farmers. Accordingly, liberalization of seed markets should be promoted in developing countries. Second, regulations that impede the availability of seed technologies must consider the potential benefits these technologies offer to farmers. Finally, policymakers and donors must weigh alleviating adoption constraints against technology improvements in their funding decisions

Framework for assessing the socio-economic impacts of Bt maize cultivation

Bt maize is the only genetically modified (GM) crop grown in the EU for commercial purposes and so far adopted mainly in Spain. Its cultivation can have a number of socio-economic consequences for farmers, upstream and downstream industries, as well as consumers. The European GMO Socio-Economics Bureau (ESEB) has compiled topics, indicators, methodological guidelines and potential data sources to carry out analyses of these socio-economic effects. This document provides a framework applicable to EU Member States currently growing Bt maize and those potentially cultivating it in the future. Over 30 topics and 100 indicators, which range from farm adoption rates to consumer surplus, have been identified by the ESEB Technical Working Group, which is composed of representatives of Member States and assisted by the European Commission's Joint Research Centre. Evidence of impacts in the EU already exists for some topics both ex post and ex ante, but for most topics it is very limited. Methodologies have been developed by the scientific community for many of the topics and indicators, from simple partial budget analysis to complex aggregated models. It is concluded that while methodologies are available for many of the topics and indicators, the main constraint is a lack of data.JRC.D.4-Economics of Agricultur

Framework for the socio-economic analysis of the cultivation of genetically modified crops

In the future the cultivation of GM crops in the EU may increase, which can have a number of socio-economic consequences for farmers, upstream and downstream industries as well as consumers. The European GMO Socio-Economics Bureau (ESEB) has compiled topics, indicators, methodological guidelines and potential data sources to carry out analyses of these socio-economic effects. This document provides a framework applicable to any GM crop that has been or might be grown in EU Member States. Almost 100 indicators, which range from farm adoption rates to consumer surplus, have been identified by the ESEB Technical Working Group composed of representatives of Member States and with assistance from the European Commission's Joint Research Centre. Evidence of impacts in the EU already exists for some crop/trait combinations both ex post and ex ante but for most topics it is very limited. Methodologies have been developed by the scientific community for many of the topics and indicators (from simple partial budget analysis to complex aggregated models). It is concluded that while methodologies are available for many of the topics and indicators, the main challenge to conducting socio-economic assessments is a lack of data.JRC.J.4-Agriculture and Life Sciences in the Econom

Trapezoidal sheeting made of stainless steel two amendments to the design codes

Trapezoidal sheeting made of stainless steel can be used for applications with high requirements on visual appearance or corrosion resistance. The calculation of the load-bearing capacity of thin-walled structures including trapezoidal sheeting normally follows the procedures of EN 1993-1-3 and similar codes. EN 1993-1-4 complements this standard concerning thin-walled structures made of stainless steel. This standard relies on many publications on thin-walled structures made of stainless steel. But unfortunately these publications almost all focus on thin-walled beams and columns and therefore some topics that are specific to trapezoidal sheeting are not recognized. The results of the presented research results on the load-bearing behaviour of thin-walled trapezoidal sheeting made of stainless steel are closing this gap: With the proposed additions to the existing design formulae, the complete calculation of the load-bearing capacity of trapezoidal sheeting made of stainless steel is possible

Best practice document for the coexistence of genetically modified potato with conventional and organic farming

The Technical Working Group (TWG) for Potato is the fourth one of the European Coexistence Bureau (ECoB) and is established for elaboration of the coexistence issues between genetically modified (GM) potato cultivation and non-GM potato and honey production in the EU. The present technical report analysed the possible sources for potential cross-pollination with GM potato and adventitious admixture of GM potato material such as seeds and pollen and presents consensually agreed by TWG for Potato best practices for coexistence. The terms of reference for this review are presented in Section 1. The scope of the Best Practice Document is coexistence in potato production in the EU. It includes the coexistence between GM potato cultivation and honey production. The ECoB TWG for Potato held two meetings in November 2015 and May 2016 and examined the state-of-the-art from scientific literature, research projects and empirical evidence provided by existing studies for segregation in potato production looking at the factors determining the cross-pollination rates in potato as well as other sources of admixture of GM material in conventional potato harvests and EU-produced honey. The review of this information (coming from a total of 155 references) is presented in a structured manner in Sections 4-6 of this document. Finally, the TWG for Potato reviewed the up to date approaches for the detection and identification of traces of GM potato material in non-GM potato harvests and honey (Section 7). The TWG for Potato of the ECoB, based on the analysis of the evidence summarised in this document submitted proposals for best management practices, which form the ground for the agreed consensus recommendations presented in Section 8, complemented by an ex-ante view about their economic impact (Section 9).JRC.D.4-Economics of Agricultur

To risk or not to risk? Risk management and farm productivity

The impact of risk management on farm productivity is still being debated. Using survey data from French and Hungarian farms, we estimate the impacts of different risk management strategies and portfolios under varying levels of risk on total factor productivity. Results from a multinomial endogenous switching regression model show that the impacts can be positive or negative, depending on the risk management strategies adopted, the structure of the farming system and the probability of risks. The choice of risk management strategies influences the farm’s production costs and the allocation of resources. More complex risk management portfolios tend to have larger negative productivity impacts due to higher costs and the larger amount of resources subtracted from the production activity. Our results have important implications for risk management policies

Are all GMOs the same? Consumer acceptance of cisgenic rice in India

Citation: Shew, A. M., Nalley, L. L., Danforth, D. M., Dixon, B. L., Nayga, R. M., Delwaide, A. C., & Valent, B. (2016). Are all GMOs the same? Consumer acceptance of cisgenic rice in India. Plant Biotechnology Journal, 14(1), 4-7. doi:10.1111/pbi.12442India has more than 215 million food-insecure people, many of whom are farmers. Genetically modified (GM) crops have the potential to alleviate this problem by increasing food supplies and strengthening farmer livelihoods. For this to occur, two factors are critical: (i) a change in the regulatory status of GM crops, and (ii) consumer acceptance of GM foods. There are generally two classifications of GM crops based on how they are bred: cisgenically bred, containing only DNA sequences from sexually compatible organisms; and transgenically bred, including DNA sequences from sexually incompatible organisms. Consumers may view cisgenic foods as more natural than those produced via transgenesis, thus influencing consumer acceptance. This premise was the catalyst for our study-would Indian consumers accept cisgenically bred rice and if so, how would they value cisgenics compared to conventionally bred rice, GM-labelled rice and 'no fungicide' rice? In this willingness-to-pay study, respondents did not view cisgenic and GM rice differently. However, participants were willing-to-pay a premium for any aforementioned rice with a 'no fungicide' attribute, which cisgenics and GM could provide. Although not significantly different (P = 0.16), 76% and 73% of respondents stated a willingness-to-consume GM and cisgenic foods, respectively

Adoption of cover crops for climate change mitigation in the EU

In order to contribute to the EU's ambitions to reduce its greenhouse gas emissions by 2030, different technological and management options are being analysed. Within the agricultural sector, catch and cover crops (CCC) are considered a viable option to mitigate greenhouse gas emissions. CCC are crops grown for the protection of the agricultural land which would otherwise be bare against erosion and nutrient losses. They immobilise nitrogen such that it remains available in the soil after the harvest of the main crop for the next main crop. If managed correctly, catch and cover crops can enhance climate change mitigation through soil carbon sequestration (building up the soil organic carbon content of the soil) and reducing emissions from fertiliser production. In this report, we conduct a survey for different case study regions in Europe (Castilla y León in Spain; Sud – Muntenia in Romania; Centre in France; and Overijssel in the Netherlands) focusing on the mitigation and adoption potential. From the survey results we observe that CCC are mainly grown after wheat, barley, silage maize or sunflower, the most popular species being ryegrasses, mustards, clovers, vetch, oats, phacelia and rye. In most cases CCC are sown after the harvest of the main crop, after a seedbed preparation, and adopters generally do not apply irrigation, N-fertilisation (mineral or organic) or crop protection. The termination of these crops is in most cases by ploughing or by using herbicides (glyphosate). In Spain, the concept of CCC is not very well known. Common vetch was the most applied species, mostly after cereals but in some cases after sugar beet or potato. Part of the CCC was undersown. Irrigation and N-manure were often applied, but seedbed preparation, N-fertiliser and crop protection were not frequently mentioned. Half of the Spanish adopters did not harvest this crop and the other half harvested it for selling, for own use or for fodder. The majority of adopters used ploughing for termination of CCC. In France, unlike the other regions in the survey, a wide variety of CCC species was applied. Black oat (Avena strigosa), white mustard (Sinapis alba), common vetch (Vicia sativa) and Phacelia were most frequently mentioned, which were mostly sown after wheat and barley harvest. French farmers are in general well informed about catch and cover crops. While most farmers apply seedbed preparation, irrigation, N-fertilization and crop protection are not often applied. The large majority of French adopters did not harvest the CCC and terminated the crop through ploughing. Dutch respondents knew the CCC-concept, since most of them grew green maize on sandy soils as a part of their fodder production for their dairy herd. Thus, they had to comply with the Nitrates Directive to grow a CCC after the maize and they did that mostly after harvest. Half of them grew Italian or English ryegrass and the other half (cutting) rye. This practice led to a relatively long CCC-period on the field compared to the three other regions in the survey. Irrigation, N-fertilisation, N-manure and crop protection were not often applied, but all adopters applied seedbed preparation. Half of the CCC-growers terminated the crop through ploughing, a quarter through a different mechanical form and the others through herbicides. In Romania, not all farmers knew the concept of CCC-growing, although quite a share of the adopters did so as an obligation by the Romanian Agency for Payments and Intervention for Agriculture. Rapeseed and green peas were the most frequently applied CCC-species, after wheat or sunflower harvest and after a seedbed preparation. Like in the other regions, irrigation, N-fertilisation, N-manure and crop protection were not often applied. The majority of adopters did not harvest the crop and more than 80% of the adopters in Romania ploughed the CCC for termination. Farming activities related to the use of CCC take on average 3.4 hours per ha. The total cost of all inputs (seeds, fertiliser/manure, pesticides, water) and all operations (seedbed preparation, sowing, application of fertiliser/manure and plant protection, irrigation, fuel, harvest and termination, including contractors hired) is on average 144 €/ha. Adopters estimated that growing CCC reduces the fertiliser need of the following main crops by 6.6%, and increases yields of the following main crops by 4.2%. Most adopters grow CCC because of existing policies and most consider cultivation mandatory. Overall, agronomic reasons play a smaller role, and environmental motives are of little relevance to the adoption decision. The reasons why non-adopters do not grow CCC include a lack of benefits, high cost and labour requirements, lack of awareness, and unsuitable weather and crop rotations, among others. A majority of non-adopters indicate that they would start growing CCC if additional subsidies were provided. Estimated CCC adoption rates based on the share of farmers using CCC range from 12% in Castilla y León, 46% in Sud – Muntenia, 84% in Centre to 99% in Overijssel. However, most adopters grow CCC on only a small share of their arable land, with the exception of Overijssel. The estimated adoption rate based on the regional area potentially available for CCC cultivation (after cereals, protein and industrial crops) is well below 20% in the Spanish, Romanian and French regions and 90% in Overijssel. The adoption potential is combined with regionally differentiated estimates of carbon sequestration from CCC per hectare to calculate the total potential climate change mitigation from CCC in each of the case study regions.JRC.D.4-Economics of Agricultur