The impact of the EU regulatory constraint of transgenic crops on farm income Julian Park, Ian McFarlane, Richard Phippsand Graziano Ceddia New Biotechnology March &_user=10&_coverDate=01%2F25%2F2011&_rdoc=1&_fmt=high&_orig=browse&_origin=browse&_sort=d&v iew=c&_acct=C &_version=1&_urlVersion=0&_userid=10&md5=9b910e9e5bcf244bcc5b33d3400d4 9fd

Method  The authors estimated on a crop by crop basis what the areas could be in Europe of the main cultivatable transgenic crops that could be usefully grown for agronomic purposes (if permitted)  Internationally derived yield and input data were used to make estimates of the current economic consequences of restricting approval, release and growth of transgenic crops across the EU27

Maize GM maize in the EU In 2009, ha transgenic maize was cultivated GM maize was planted in 6 EU countries; Spain, Czech Republic, Portugal, Slovakia, Romania and Poland Benefits that might accrue to EU farmers adopting GM maize Reduction of pest damage results in higher yields Input saving together with yield increase can lead to a net benefit with an estimated value to the total of EU farmers in between €157 and €334 Million

Cotton GM cotton worldwide 16.7 Mha of Bt cotton was grown worldwide in 2009, almost half of 33 Mha of world cotton cultivation GM cotton in the EU No Bt cotton is permitted for cultivation in EU Both Greece and Spain have significant conventional cotton production Benefits that might accrue to EU farmers adopting GM cotton Wherever cotton is grown in the world, it is vulnerable to damage caused by bollworm Earias insulana The economic advantage per ha to EU farms would be in between €50/ ha and €150/ha

Soyabean GM soyabean worldwide 77% of the 90Mha of soybean grown globally in 2009 was transgenic GM soyabean in the EU No transgenic soya is now permitted for cultivation in the EU Conventional soyabeans are grown in 9 EU countries, with a total acreage of only 0.5 Mha Benefits that might accrue to EU farmers adopting GM soyabean The estimated benefit would be in between €5 and €19 M, mostly because of input savings

Oilseed rape GM oilseed rape worldwide HT canola cultivation in 2009 represented about 20% of the 31 Mha of rape cultivation worldwide GM oilseed rape in the EU Transgenic oilseed rape is not yet approved for field scale cultivation in the EU About 6 Mha was planted with conventional rape in the EU in 2009 Benefits that might accrue to EU farmers adopting GM oilseed rape GM canola offers higher gross margins than its conventional counterpart There would be a net benefit of between €30 and €49/ha of introducing transgenic canola to EU This could lead to a potential annual benefits to EU farmers of between €195 and €318 M

Sugarbeet GM sugarbeet worldwide HT sugarbeet was recently introduced in the US and Canada to help farmers deal with weed pressure GM sugarbeet in the EU GM sugarbeet is not yet approved for cultivation in the EU In 2008, 101 Mt of conventional sugar beet was produced from 1.46 Mha of cultivation Benefits that might accrue to EU farmers adopting GM sugarbeet Savings from adoption of HT sugar beet are likely to be in the range €50- €150/ha The annual economics benefit for growers in EU over the current 1.46 Mha would be in between €73 and €219 M

Estimated benefit to EU of adoption of trangenic crops per crop cycle

Results  On the basis of the areas of transgenic maize, cotton, soyabean, canola/rape and sugarbeet that could potentially be grown if more widely available it is estimated that gross margin improvements to the industry could be between €443 and €929 M/year  Essentially this can be viewed as revenue foregone by EU farmers who are not accessing this important technology  Given that established transgenic traits already reduce pesticide loading and appear in some cases to increase yield and economic income in many parts of the world, it could be regarded as negligent to ignore such technology given the environmental, food security and population growth issues that are currently challenging governments across the world  As new events are released which may include salt tolerant, drought tolerant, nitrogen- efficient and nutritionally enhanced varieties it seems unlikely that the EU can reasonably continue with its current severe restrictions that inhibit progress in the area  Continued non-use of the technology is essentially reducing the competitive advantage of EU farmers on world markets. As new events continue to come to market this gap could potentially widen