Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Producer Choice

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Socio-Economic Considerations in Biotechnology Regulation

Part of the book series: Natural Resource Management and Policy ((NRMP,volume 37))

  • 981 Accesses

Abstract

SECs relevant to producer choice include freedom of choice, income security, control over production, contamination of organic agriculture, and farmers’ rights to save seeds; however, producer concerns are heterogeneous in time and space.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
eBook
USD 16.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  • Ali A, Abdulai A (2010) The adoption of genetically modified cotton and poverty reduction in Pakistan. J Agric Econ 61:175–192

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ashby JA, Sperling A (1995) Institutionalizing participatory client-driven research and technology development in agriculture. Dev Chang 26:753–770

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bates SL, Zhao J-Z, Roush RT et al (2005) Insect resistance management in GM crops: past, present and future. Nat Biotechnol 23:57–62

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bennett R, Morse S, Ismael Y (2006) The economic impact of genetically modified cotton on South African smallholders: yield, profit and health effects. J Dev Stud 42:662–677

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Birol E, Rayn E, Smale M (2007) Farmer preferences for milpa diversity and genetically modified maize in Mexico: a latent class approach. IFPRI discussion paper 00726

    Google Scholar 

  • Burdge RJ, Vanclay F (1996) Social impact assessment: a contribution to the state of the art series. Impact Assess 14:59–86

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • COGEM (2009) Socio-economic aspects of GMOs: building blocks for an EU sustainability assessment of genetically modified crops. COGEM Report CGM/090929–01

    Google Scholar 

  • Crost B, Shankar B, Bennett R et al (2007) Bias from farmer self selection in genetically modified crop productivity estimates: evidence from India data. J Agric Econ 58:24–36

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dawson E (1998) The relevance of social audit for Oxfam GB. J Bus Ethics 17:1457–1469

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • De Groote H, Overholt WA, Ouma JO et al (2011) Assessing the potential economic impact of Bacillus thuringiensis (Bt) maize in Kenya. Afr J Biotechnol 10:4741–4751

    Google Scholar 

  • Demont M, Devos Y (2008) Regulating coexistence of GM and non-GM crops without jeopardizing economic incentives. Trends Biotechnol 26:353–358

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Devos Y, Demont M, Dillen K et al (2009) Coexistence of genetically modified (GM) and non-GM crops in the European Union. Rev Agron Sustain Dev 29:11–30

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Edmeades S, Smale M (2006) A trait-based model of the potential demand for a genetically engineered food crop in a developing economy. Agric Econ 35:351–361

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Endres AB (2005) Revising seed purity laws to account for the adventitious presence of genetically modified varieties: a first step towards coexistence. J Food Law Policy 1:131–163

    Google Scholar 

  • Ezezika OC, Thomas F, Lavery JV et al (2009) A social audit model for agro-biotechnology initiatives in developing countries: accounting for ethical, social, cultural, and commercialization issues. J Tech Manag Innov 4:24–33

    Google Scholar 

  • Falck-Zepeda J, Cohen J, Meinzen-Dick R et al (2002) Biotechnology and sustainable livelihoods—findings and recommendation of an international consultation. International Service for National Agricultural Research, briefing paper no. 54

    Google Scholar 

  • Falck-Zepeda J, Horna D, Smale M (2008) Betting on cotton: potential payoffs and economic risks of adopting transgenic cotton in West Africa. Afr J Agric Res Econ 2:188–207

    Google Scholar 

  • Falck-Zepeda JB, Zambrano P (2011) Socio-economic consideration in biosafety and biotechnology decision making: the Cartagena protocol and national biosafety frameworks. Rev Policy Res 28:171–195

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fransen L, La Vina A, Dayrit F et al (2005) Integrating socio-economic considerations into biosafety decisions: the role of public participation. World Resources Institute, Washington DC

    Google Scholar 

  • Gerstetter C, Gorlach B, Neumann K et al (2007) The international treaty on plant genetic resources for food and agriculture within the current legal regime complex on plant genetic resources. J World Intellect Prop 10:259–283

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Groeneveld RA, Ansink E, van de Wiel CCM et al (2011) Benefits and costs of biologically contained genetically modified tomatoes and eggplants in Italy and Spain. Sustainability 3:1265–1281

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hareau GG, Mills BF, Norton GW (2006) The potential benefits of herbicide-resistant transgenic rice in Uruguay: lessons for small developing countries. Food Policy 31:162–179

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Herring RJ (2007) Stealth seeds: bioproperty, biosafety, biopolitics. J Dev Stud 43:130–157

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hossain F, Pray CE, Lu Y et al (2004). Genetically modified cotton and farmers’ health in China. Int J Occup Environ Health 10:296–303

    Google Scholar 

  • Huang J, Hu R, Pray CE et al (2003) Biotechnology as an alternative to chemical pesticides: a case study of Bt cotton in China. Agric Econ 29:55–67

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kalaitzandonakes N, Magnier A, Miller D (2010) Market power and dynamic efficiency in the US seed industry. Working Paper, EMAC, University of Missouri, USA

    Google Scholar 

  • Kelman S (1981) Cost-benefit analysis: an ethical critique. Regulation 5:33–40

    Google Scholar 

  • Kikulwe EM (2010). On the introduction of genetically modified bananas in Uganda: social benefits costs, and consumer preferences. PhD Thesis. Wageningen University, Netherlands

    Google Scholar 

  • Krishna VV, Qaim M (2007). Estimating the adoption of Bt eggplant in India: who benefits from public-private partnership? Food Policy 32:523–543

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Krishna VV, Qaim M (2008) Potential impact of Bt eggplant on economic surplus and farmers’ health in India. Agric Econ 38:167–180

    Google Scholar 

  • Kuosmanen T, Pemsl D, Wesseler J (2006) Specification and estimation of production functions involving damage control inputs: a two-stage, semiparametric approach. Am J Agric Econ 88:499–511

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Morse S, Bennett R (2008) Impact of Bt cotton on farmer livelihoods in South Africa. Int J Biotechnol 10:224–239

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Morse S, Bennett RM, Ismael Y (2005) Bt-cotton boosts the gross margin of small-scale cotton producers in South Africa. Int J Biotechnol 7:72–83

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nazli H (2010) Impact of Bt cotton adoption on farmers’ wellbeing in Pakistan. PhD Thesis, University of Guelph, Canada

    Google Scholar 

  • Nuffield Council on Bioethics (2004) The use of genetically modified crops in developing countries: a follow-up discussion paper. Nuffield Council on Bioethics, London. Available at www.nuffieldbioethics.org/gm-crops-developing-countries

  • Qaim M (2001) A prospective evaluation of biotechnology in semi-subsistence agriculture. Agric Econ 25:165–175

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Qaim M (2009) The economics of genetically modified crops. Annu Rev Resour Econ 1:665–693

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Qaim M, Traxler G (2005) Roundup ready soybeans in Argentina: farm level and aggregate welfare effects. Agric Econ 32:73–86

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Qaim M, Zilberman D (2003) Yield effects of genetically modified crops in developing countries. Science 299:900–902

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Raney T, Matuschke I (2011) Current and potential farm-level impacts of genetically modified crops in developing countries. Frontiers of Economics and Globalization 10:55-82

    Google Scholar 

  • Shankar B, Thirtle C (2005) Pesticide productivity and transgenic cotton technology: the South African smallholder case. J Agric Econ 56:97–116

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shankar B, Bennett R, Morse S (2007) Output risk aspects of genetically modified crop technology in South Africa. Econ Innov New Tech 16:277–291

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Smale M, Zambrano P, Cartel M (2006) Bales and balance: a review of the methods used to assess the economic impact of Bt cotton on farmers in developing economies. AgBioForum 9:195–212

    Google Scholar 

  • Smale M, Zambrano P, Falck-Zepeda J et al (2008) The economic impact of transgenic crops in developing countries: a note on the methods. Int J Biotechnol 10:519–551

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Smale M, Zambrano P, Gruère G et al (2009) Measuring the economic impacts of transgenic crops in developing agriculture during the first decade: approaches, findings and future directions, Chap. 3—Impacts on farmers. International Food Policy Research Institute

    Google Scholar 

  • Stabinsky D (2000) Bringing social analysis into a multilateral environmental agreement: social impact assessment and the biosafety protocol. J Environ Dev 9:260–283

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Takeshima H, Gruère GP (2011) Pressure group competition and GMO regulations in Sub-Saharan Africa—insights from the Becker model. J Agric Food Ind Organ. doi:10.2202/1542-0485.1325

    Google Scholar 

  • Third World Network (2008) Assessing the socio-economic, cultural and ethical impacts of GMOs. Third World Network briefings for MOP 4–3

    Google Scholar 

  • Vanclay F (2003) Social impact assessment: international principles. International association for impact assessment, special publication series no 2

    Google Scholar 

  • Vitale J, Boyer T, Uaiene R et al (2007) The economic impacts of introducing Bt technology in smallholder cotton production systems of West Africa: a case study from Mali. AgBioForum 10:71–84

    Google Scholar 

  • Yenagi BS, Patil VC, Biradar DP et al (2011) Refuge cropping systems for Helicoverpa armigera (Hubner) resistance management in BT cotton (Gossypium hirsutum). Acad J Entomol 4:102–107

    Google Scholar 

  • Yorobe JM Jr, Quicoy CB (2006) Economic impact of Bt corn in the Philippines. Philipp Agric Sci 89:258–267

    Google Scholar 

  • Zimmermann R, Qaim M (2004) Potential health benefits of golden rice: a Philippine case study. Food Policy 29:147–168

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. United States Botanic Garden, Washington, DC, USA

    Ari Novy

  2. Smithsonian Institution, National Museum of Natural History, Washington, DC, USA

    Ari Novy

  3. Department of Agriculture, Food and Resource Economics, Rutgers University, New Jersey, USA

    Latha Nagarajan

  4. International Fertilizer Development Center (IFDC), Washington, DC, USA

    Latha Nagarajan

Authors
  1. Ari Novy
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Latha Nagarajan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Ari Novy .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Faculty of Law, Monash University, VIC, Australia

    Karinne Ludlow

  2. University of Saskatchewan, Saskatoon, Canada

    Stuart J. Smyth

  3. International Food Policy Research Inst., Washington, DC, District of Columbia, USA

    José Falck-Zepeda

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2014 Springer Science+Business Media, LLC

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Novy, A., Nagarajan, L. (2014). Producer Choice. In: Ludlow, K., Smyth, S., Falck-Zepeda, J. (eds) Socio-Economic Considerations in Biotechnology Regulation. Natural Resource Management and Policy, vol 37. Springer, New York, NY. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4614-9440-9_16

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4614-9440-9_16

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, New York, NY

  • Print ISBN: 978-1-4614-9439-3

  • Online ISBN: 978-1-4614-9440-9

  • eBook Packages: Business and EconomicsEconomics and Finance (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation