An Economic Cost-Benefit Analysis of GM Crop Cultivation: An Irish Case Study Marie-Louise Flannery, Fiona S. Thorne, B Paul W. Kelly and Ewen Mullins.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
IPM in wheat. The EU requires IPM by what does this mean??? 1.Blind Chemical control –Schematic and routine treatments 2.Chemical control based.
Advertisements

GMs in Europe: Reflections on the Economic Consequences Julian Park, Ian McFarlane.
Copyright © University of Minnesota. All Rights Reserved. Conservation Tillage Workshop Heron Lake, MN March 22, 2012 David Bau Extension Educator.
Level II Agricultural Business Operations.  Registration (1)  Crop production (7)  Plant health (3)  Business management (4)  IT (2)  Health and.
Ukraine’s Sunflower Sector: The Main Conclusions of the EBRD/FAO/LMC Study Presentation by James Fry LMC International, Oxford, UK June 2004.
DISCLAIMER The purpose of the following material is to promote the awareness of risk management concepts and to highlight USDA’s risk management products,
Module 2 Healthy Plant Appearance When doing a field diagnosis, know how a healthy plant should appear. Consider the many parameters that can affect a.
Danish Crop Production Seminar 2007 Smart Plant Protection Jens Erik Jensen, DAAS Lise Nistrup Jørgensen, FAS Per Kudsk, FAS Ghita Cordsen Nielsen, DAAS.
Rural Economy Research Centre Situation and Outlook Conference SITUATION AND OUTLOOK FOR TILLAGE 2008/2009 F. Thorne Rural Economy Research Centre.
Brazil China United States Crop Budget Comparison In which areas are each of the countries most competitive and why?
19/04/2017 Exploring adaptation strategies for climate change in the Netherlands: a bio-economic farm level analysis Argyris Kanellopoulos, Pytrik Reidsma,
GMOs CGW4U.
Economics of Risk Management in Agriculture Bruce A. Babcock Center for Agricultural and Rural Development Iowa State University, USA.
Precision Agriculture in Europe Olga S. Walsh BIOEN/SOIL 4213 Spring 2007.
BIOLOGY 157: LIFE SCIENCE: AN ENVIRONMENTAL APPROACH (Energy needs: Food)
Cook Spring  Supply – the amount of a product that would be offered for sale at all possible prices that could prevail in the market  Law of Supply.
EFFECT OF THE LOSS OF PLANT PROTECTION PRODUCTS RICHARD KING October 2014.
NDSU Extension The Marketing of Biotechnology Products Phil McClean Department of Plant Science North Dakota State University Biology 600 Biotechnology:
LECTURE 1 INTRODUCTION.
Calculating Enterprise Net Margins Gross margins are a useful comparison but don’t always show if a crop is profitable. Net Margins include the total cost.
EFarmer.us Potatoes Production, Market, and Expected Return December 2008 copyright eStudy.us 2008
Vegetable Crops –PLSC 451/551 Lecture 11, Irish or White Potato Instructor: Dr. Stephen L. Love Aberdeen R & E Center 1693 S 2700 W Aberdeen, ID
Modernising rice farming Large scale irrigation
Business and Economic Applications. Summary of Business Terms and Formulas  x is the number of units produced (or sold)  p is the price per unit  R.
Economic model of transgenic crop adoption Ian McFarlane, Julian Park, Graziano Ceddia.
200 pt 300 pt 400 pt 500 pt 100 pt 200 pt 300 pt 400 pt 500 pt 100 pt 200pt 300 pt 400 pt 500 pt 100 pt 200 pt 300 pt 400 pt 500 pt 100 pt 200 pt 300 pt.
How can all of the people in the world be fed????????????? Created by Ms. McFadden.
Managing the co-existence of conventional and genetically modified maize from field to silo A French initiative Pascal COQUIN AGPM 23-25, avenue de Neuilly.
Estimating Supply Response in the EU Carlos Arnade, David Kelch, and Susan Leetmaa ERS Economists.
© T. M. Whitmore TODAY “The Green Revolution” continued.
Farm Field Record Keeping Jim Dunn Agricultural Economist Penn State University.
The case against GM crops Alissa Cook policy officer Soil Association.
Integrated Pest Management. Learning Objectives 1.Define IPM (Integrated or Insect Pest Management). 2.Describe why IPM is important. 3.Describe what.
Presentation Title Capacity Building Programme on the Economics of Adaptation Supporting National/Sub-National Adaptation Planning and Action Adaptation.
Integrating Environmental Accounting into Jenna Way Zach Millang 2014 REACCH Internship Project Oregon State University.
Level II Agricultural Business Operations.  Understand and identify the key crop production targets  Be able to state performance targets for individual.
Discussion of costs and benefits of GM plants ARISE August 8, 2007.
A Comparison from Matching Surveys in Africa and China: Plan in China Jinxia Wang Center for Chinese Agricultural Policy (CCAP) Chinese Academy of Sciences.
Extension and Outreach/Department of Economics Crop Insurance 2013 National Agricultural Credit Conference San Diego, California Apr. 17, 2013 Chad Hart.
Record Keeping and Cost Classification Parr Rosson Professor and Director Center for North American Studies Texas A&M University.
Economics of Crop Production. The Three Components of Profit Crop Yield Production Cost Selling Price Received.
Managing With Tight Operating Margins Ron Haugen North Dakota State University Extension Service 2016 Extension Risk Management Educational National Conference.
Modern Day Farm Yard Farming in the 21 st
Farming Around the World. Do farms vary throughout the world?
Farm Equipment Market: By Type (Tractors, Fertilizing, Plant protection Equipment, Harvesting Equipment, Irrigation Equipment, Others); By Phase (Land.
Global Impact of Biotech Crops: economic & environmental effects Graham Brookes PG Economics Ltd UK ©PG Economics Ltd 2016.
Financial Returns from Biomass Crops: A Comparison with Conventional Agricultural Systems Fiona Thorne and Barry Caslin Teagasc Rural Economy and Development.
Crop Insurance Basics Trent Milacek NW Area Ag Econ Specialist
Graham Brookes, Farzad Taheripour, and Wallace E. Tyner
Industrial Beet Production: Revenue, Costs, and Returns
Organic Vegetables/Grains
WORKSHOP ON CULTURAL AND RELIGIOUS ISSUES SURROUNDING GMO’S
Chapter 11: Kay and Edwards
Section 18 Emergency Exemption
Business Economics The Behavior of Firms.
Tunnel Farming of vegetables ( Production of sequences of Tunnel Vegetables ) A Series of Lectures to Tunnel Farming Group The University of Agriculture.
Habits of Financially Resilient Farms - continued
Economics of Farm Enterprises II. (Farm Management II.) MSc level
Partial Budgeting AAE 320 Paul D. Mitchell.
2014 Commodity Programs and Supplemental Coverage Option
Utilizing Crop Insurance for the Average Producer
Grain and Oilseed Outlook
US Farming Market Outlook
PESTICIDE USAGE SURVEY IN TURKEY
Crop Production and Principles
Agribusiness.
Record Keeping and Cost Classification
Ascend Idea Starters.
Partial Budgeting AAE 320 Paul D. Mitchell.
Presentation transcript:

An Economic Cost-Benefit Analysis of GM Crop Cultivation: An Irish Case Study Marie-Louise Flannery, Fiona S. Thorne, B Paul W. Kelly and Ewen Mullins

GM Crops in Ireland At the time of study, no GM crop cultivation in Ireland (EU had put a moratorium on import and production of GM foods) Existing varieties of crops (non-GM) susceptible to disease- winter wheat susceptible to fungal diseases due to mild and wet Irish climate.

Goal Conduct cost-benefit analysis of four genetically modified (GM) crops Winter wheat Spring barley Sugar beet Potato

Methodology Compare net revenue from GM crop to existing (non GM) crop Include fixed and variable costs: Materials (seed, fertilizers, herbicides, fungicides, insecticides, growth regulators) Machinery hire (plowing, tilling, sowing, spraying, fertilizer spreading, harvesting) Miscellaneous costs (interest [7%] and transport)

Seed Cost GM seed not sold in Ireland Relied on literature to derive a seed premium for sugar beet GM. Other crops: assumed a 15% premium.

Legislative Constraint GM crops must be kept separate from other crops Test importance of restriction, add “coexistence levy” of €25 per ha to capture extra cost of this rule.

Benefits Trials in Europe and Ireland reveal 6% increase in yield for sugar beets. Wheat, barley and potato – no yield experiments in EU. Authors assume pesticide cost reduction.

Sampling Finally, used two years that were considered representative: 2002: low yield, high disease 2003: high yield, low disease Took average of two years.

Current Acreage Sugar beet: 31,500 (ha) Winter wheat: 60,500 ha Spring barley: 163,270 ha Potato: 14,150 ha

Analysis Used actual, non-GM yields and costs for 2002 and 2003 to compute net revenue per hectare. Predicted net revenue for GM crops in 2002 and 2003 given yield and cost assumptions. Net benefit is change in net revenues across all acreage.

Sugar Beet Results CategoryConventionalGMNet Effect Yield45483 Gross Revenue Seed Cost Herbicide Other Costs Total Cost Net Revenue % Change+29%

Wheat Results CategoryConventionalGMNet Effect Yield9.1 0 Gross Revenue Seed Cost Herbicide Other Costs707 0 Total Cost Net Revenue % Change+9%

All Crops.

Unmeasured Factors EU may prohibit sale of GM crops in EU. Project could fail unless export to rest of world. Risk GM crops destroy regular crops- should be minimized by cost of coexistence levy Does not consider market responses (appropriate) Assumes no change in hectares planted Does not examine possible change in price

Results GM crops have higher net benefits (net revenue per hectare) than non-GM crops. Net benefit varies by crop type (highest for sugar beet). Major gain is not in higher yields but in lower costs.