Search results

Purpose – The role of genetically modified (GM) crops for food security is the subject of controversial debates. Consequently, policy-makers are unsure whether this technology is suitable for developing countries. This chapter reviews the scientific evidence.

Methodology/approach – Starting from a food security definition, potential pathways of how GM crops could contribute to hunger reduction are analyzed conceptually. Furthermore, studies about the socioeconomic impacts of GM crop applications are reviewed. This includes ex post studies for present applications such as insect-resistant and herbicide-tolerant crops, as well as ex ante studies for future GM technologies such as Golden Rice and drought-tolerant varieties.

Findings – GM crops can raise agricultural productivity and thus contribute to better food availability. Especially when tailored to small farm conditions, GM crops can also cause income increases for the rural poor, entailing better access to food. Nutritionally enhanced, biofortified GM crops could reduce problems of micronutrient malnutrition in a cost-effective way.

Research limitations – The examples observable so far are still limited. Impacts also depend on the wider institutional setting. Like any technology, GM crops are not a substitute but a complement to much needed institutional and infrastructure improvement in developing countries.

Social implications – The fact that available GM crops already contribute to poverty reduction and improved food security has not been widely recognized up until now.

Value of paper – Results presented in this chapter can contribute to a more constructive public debate, in which GM crop risks are not discussed out of the context of actual and potential benefits.

The application of modern biotechnology to crop and food production is one of the most significant technological advances to impact modern agriculture. Barely a dozen years since their introduction, genetically modified (GM) crops are currently grown on more than 300 million acres worldwide. GM (or transgenic) crops are produced using plant biotechnology to select desirable characteristics in plants and transfer genes from one organism to another. As a result, crops can survive under harsher conditions, costs are lowered, and yields are improved. Scientists are introducing genes into plants that will give the plants resistance to herbicides, insects, disease, drought, and salt in the soil. Crop research in bioengineering is also aimed at improving the nutritional quality of food, such as providing healthier vegetable oils. Pharmaceutical and industrial crops (or “pharma” crops) are also on the horizon, with the potential to dramatically reduce drug production costs. Compared to traditional plant breeding, biotechnology can produce new varieties of plants more quickly and efficiently, and it can introduce desirable traits into plants that could not be established through conventional plant breeding techniques.

This chapter analyzes the economic implications of genetic engineering for food security. We discuss the asynchronous nature of genetically modified (GM) crop regulation and labeling requirements among countries, associated politics, and consumer perceptions of GM crops.

We perform an ex-ante analysis of the introduction of a GM rice variety in major rice exporting and importing countries (including potential producer and consumer impacts) within the framework of a partial equilibrium trade model.

Although the introduction of a GM rice variety that increases global yield by 5% could result in a consumer gain of US$23.4 billion to US$74.8 billion, it could also result in a producer loss of US$9.7 billion to US$63.7 billion. The estimated net gain to society could be US$11.1 billion to US$13.7 billion. Overall, we find a positive economic surplus for major exporters and importers of rice based on a 5% supply increase with a GM rice variety.

The adoption of transgenic (GM) rice varieties would have a far greater impact on rice prices for poorer counties than for richer countries. Therefore, GM rice may help ensure that more people throughout the world would have food security.

In many societies, conflicts of violent nature regularly spring up that usually cause a destruction of economic and social assets and needless loss of human lives. Violent conflicts and food entitlements seem to bear mutual feedbacks: first and foremost, as violent conflicts result in destruction of economic assets, conflicts usually tell upon the cultivation of foods, procurement and storage of foods and also the distribution and marketing of foods. The disruption in the agrarian sector can lead to serious decline in food availability and consequent famines, which can exacerbate and fuel further conflicts. On the other hand, the distribution and availability of foods can trigger violent conflicts in backward societies as a means to acquire and retain food entitlements, which can in turn jeopardise the agrarian equilibrium. Thus, the relationship between food entitlements and conflicts are a double-edged sword that can lend precarious instability to a backward society. During the last five decades, governments in developing nations have kept a close vigil on their agrarian sector, yet there is a clear indication in the global economy that warns of a looming food crisis, especially in the poorer regions of our globe. Food crises can seriously challenge global peace. Conflicts and hunger are hence complex phenomena. This chapter provides a comprehensive, and possibly the first, study of the economics of food entitlements and potential threats of conflicts in the current conjuncture.

The widespread introduction of genetically modified (GM) crops may change the effect of agriculture on the environment. The magnitude and direction of expected effects are still being hotly debated, and the interests served in this discussion arena are often far from those of science and social welfare maximization. This chapter proposes that GM crops have net positive environmental effects, while regulatory responses focus mainly on environmental concerns, giving an unbalanced picture of the regulatory context. This unbalance supports the hypothesis that environmental concerns about GM crops have been politically instrumentalized and that more attention should be paid to regulatory responses considering the environmental benefits of this technology. It is also argued that a number of environmental effects have not yet been quantified and more research is needed in this direction.

Food security was investigated in three villages in rural Ethiopia for smallholder farmers growing staple crops and coffee. Field surveys were conducted through extensive interviews of head of households in three villages in the coffee-growing region of Oromia. We computed basic descriptive statistics and estimated a discrete variable model of the food security status of households and its socioeconomic determinants. We found that commercial input used among smallholders remains sporadic and pricey. Most households produce coffee as a key source of cash income, and rely on a major coffee cooperative to market their coffee. The coffee cooperative helps with transportation costs, eases market participation decisions, and provides better and stable prices. Many farmers rely on credit and banking services offered by the cooperative. These services contribute to food security. Most food-insecure households tend to be headed by females and have severe land constraints. These households also tend to work outside of their own farm more often at lower-return activities than do food-secure households. Despite the fast growing economy of Ethiopia, smallholder households face considerable impediments to improve their economic livelihoods and market participation due to limited land and poor transportation and telecommunications infrastructures. Policies lowering the unit cost and increasing the local availability of commercial inputs for agriculture would be useful to boost staple food production and income generation of smallholders systematically. Better infrastructures and easier access to land would help mitigate food insecurity.

The global demand for agricultural commodities may more than double in the second half of the twenty-first century. It has been suggested that rapidly growing world needs in food and agriculture can be met by expanding the acreage or cultivation of existing farmland. Because available land for farming is limited, about 90% of future production growth is expected to result from yield growth, with only 10% realized at the cost of acreage expansion.

In this chapter, we analyze the multitude of social benefits of modern agriculture. We also expand the traditional analysis of the return to research methodology by explicitly including environmental and other benefits of crop yield growth.

A key result of our analysis is that the environmental benefits of productivity growth far exceed the direct economic benefits to consumers and producers from an expansion of production. Hence, restricting analysis solely to price and quantity effects seriously underestimates the social benefits of modern agriculture.

The environmental benefits of yield growth in modern agriculture far exceed the traditional measure of social welfare.

The Papua New Guinea (PNG) LNG project had a direct impact on many rural villagers in the project area. A Livelihood Restoration (LR) program, and later a Community Livelihood Improvement Program (CLIP), was established to assist displaced villagers with food supply and entry into the cash economy. Here we use a case study of the food processing component to focus on gender and social issues addressed through the action research process.

Over the period from 2015 to 2017, over 9000 women and men had received some training during the CLIP program, of whom 77 per cent were women. In the food processing component, women and men were trained to produce a variety of dishes. Training was also conducted in preparation of tasty and nutritious meals for the households, basic human nutrition and hygiene.

Using the action research process, we modified the program as the situation changed and as we learnt from the successes and failures in the program. Overall, the LR and CLIP programs were very successful. Several positive social outcomes occurred, including improved financial independence of many women, raised status of women in their community and a reduction in domestic violence.

Contributions to the program’s success include a gender-balanced team of agricultural, food processing and community engagement specialists; the team learnt from mistakes and modified the program using the action research process; the program was well funded by the PNG LNG Project; and success in the early stages of the program led to ongoing funding once the construction phase ended.

Purpose – The chapter provides a comprehensive review of trade-related regulations of genetically modified (GM) food, identifies their main effects, and analyzes the main motivations behind their support.

Methodology/approach – The analysis is substantiated by (a) results from the literature on GM food regulations and (b) comparative statics results from a simplified three-country partial equilibrium welfare and political economic model.

Findings – The analysis shows that in a non-GM producing country, trade-related regulations will benefit producers, but not necessarily consumers. Producers' support is found to be instrumental to push for a ban, for information requirements on shipments, or for mandatory labeling of GM food products. Outside pressure groups will play the role of swing voters in cases where consumers and producers do not agree.

Research limitations/implications – The analytical model is based on simplifying assumptions on the groups and market effects of each regulation. Future research is needed to empirically validate some of the main results.

Originality/value of the chapter – The goal of the chapter is to inform economic and policy researchers on the effects of GM food trade-related regulations. The chapter provides an updated comprehensive overview of the key trade regulations of GM food. It uses a unique model to derive the main welfare effects of GM food regulations. By comparing the effects of GM food regulations in different types of countries for different pressure groups, the findings provide new insights in this area.