23 resultados para Maïs Bt
Resumo:
This paper describes some of the results of a detailed farm-level survey of 32 small-scale cotton farmers in the Makhathini Flats region of South Africa. The aim was to assess and measure some of the impacts (especially in terms of savings in pesticide and labour as well as benefits to human health) attributable to the use of insect-tolerant Bt cotton. The study reveals a direct cost benefit for Bt growers of SAR416 ($51) per hectare per season due to a reduction in the number of insecticide applications. Cost savings emerged in the form of lower requirements for pesticide, but also important were reduced requirements for water and labour. The reduction in the number of sprays was particularly beneficial to women who do some spraying and children who collect water and assist in spraying. The increasing adoption rate of Bt cotton appears to have a health benefit measured in terms of reported rates of accidental insecticide poisoning. These appear to be declining as the uptake of Bt cotton increases. However, the understanding of refugia and their management by local farmers are deficient and need improving. Finally, Bt cotton growers emerge as more resilient in absorbing price fluctuations.
Resumo:
The study reported presents the findings relating to commercial growing of genetically-modified Bt cotton in South Africa by a large sample of smallholder farmers over three seasons (1998/99, 1999/2000, 2000/01) following adoption. The analysis presents constructs and compares groupwise differences for key variables in Bt v. non-Bt technology and uses regressions to further analyse the production and profit impacts of Bt adoption. Analysis of the distribution of benefits between farmers due to the technology is also presented. In parallel with these socio-economic measures, the toxic loads being presented to the environment following the introduction of Bt cotton are monitored in terms of insecticide active ingredient (ai) and the Biocide Index. The latter adjusts ai to allow for differing persistence and toxicity of insecticides. Results show substantial and significant financial benefits to smallholder cotton growers of adopting Bt cotton over three seasons in terms of increased yields, lower insecticide spray costs and higher gross margins. This includes one particularly wet, poor growing season. In addition, those with the smaller holdings appeared to benefit proportionately more from the technology (in terms of higher gross margins) than those with larger holdings. Analysis using the Gini-coefficient suggests that the Bt technology has helped to reduce inequality amongst smallholder cotton growers in Makhathini compared to what may have been the position if they had grown conventional cotton. However, while Bt growers applied lower amounts of insecticide and had lower Biocide Indices (per ha) than growers of non-Bt cotton, some of this advantage was due to a reduction in non-bollworm insecticide. Indeed, the Biocide Index for all farmers in the population actually increased with the introduction of Bt cotton. The results indicate the complexity of such studies on the socio-economic and environmental impacts of GM varieties in the developing world.
Resumo:
The economic benefits of Genetically Modified (GM) crops in developing countries have been well documented, but little research has been undertaken to date on the impacts of GM adoption on household livelihoods. The research reported here aimed to assess the livelihood impacts of the adoption of Bt cotton in South Africa., and involved 100 interviews of resource-poor farmers growing Bt cotton in Makhathini Flats, South Africa. Some 88% of respondents reported a higher income from Bt compared to non-Bt varieties previously grown by them, and this higher income was used primarily for greater education of their children (76%), more investment in growing cotton (46%), repaying debt (28%), investment in other crops (20%) and spending money on themselves. Some 89% had increased their asset base due to Bt cotton, primarily by increasing their cultivable land. These benefits of Bt adoption appeared widespread regardless of gender or farm size.
Resumo:
There is much debate about the potential benefits (and costs) of genetically modified (GM) crop technology for developing countries. Studies have been carried out in Argentina, China, Indonesia and most recently India1 to assess the impact of Bacillus thuringiensis (Bt) cotton on farmers in those regions.
Resumo:
This paper explores some of the issues involved in the Genetic Modification (GM) debate by focusing on one crop that has been modified for pest resistance, cotton (Gossypium hirsutum), and commercially released to small-scale farmers in the Makhathini Flats, KwaZulu Natal, the Republic of South Africa. This was the first commercial release of a GM variety (Bt-cotton) in Sub-Saharan Africa, and thus provides valuable and timely insights into some of the potential advantages and disadvantages of the technology for small-scale farmers in Africa. Even though there are wider concerns regarding the vulnerability of small-scale farmers in the area, the survey results suggest that Bt-cotton generated higher yields and gross margins than non-Bt-cotton. In addition, Bt-cotton significantly reduced the use of pesticide with consequent potential benefits to human health and the environment.
Resumo:
The present paper explores the 'farmer' effect in economic advantages often claimed for Bt cotton varieties (those with the endotoxin gene from Bacillus thuringiensis conferring resistance to some insect pests) compared to non-Bt varieties. Critics claim that much of the yield advantage of Bt cotton could be due to the fact that farmers adopting the technology are in a better position to provide inputs and management and so much of any claimed Bt advantage is an artefact rather than reflecting a real advantage of the variety per se. The present paper provides an in-depth analysis of 63 non-adopting and 94 adopting households of Bt cotton in Jalgaon, Maharashtra State, India, spanning the seasons 2002 and 2003. Results suggest that Bt adopters are indeed different from non-adopters in a number of ways. Adopters appear to specialize more on cotton (at least in terms of the land area they devote to the crop), spend more money on irrigation and grow well-performing non-Bt varieties of cotton (Bunny). Taking gross margin as the basis for comparison, Bt plots had 2.5 times the gross margin of non-Bt plots in both seasons. If only adopters are considered then the gross margin advantage of Bt plots reduces to 1.6 times that of non-Bt plots. This is still a significant advantage and could well explain the popularity of Bt in Maharashtra. However, it is clear that great care needs to be taken with such comparative studies.
Resumo:
This paper describes some of the results of a detailed farm-level survey of 32 small-scale cotton farmers in the Makhathini Flats region of South Africa. The aim was to assess and measure some of the impacts (especially in terms of savings in pesticide and labour as well as benefits to human health) attributable to the use of insect-tolerant Bt cotton. The study reveals a direct cost benefit for Bt growers of SAR416 ($51) per hectare per season due to a reduction in the number of insecticide applications. Cost savings emerged in the form of lower requirements for pesticide, but also important were reduced requirements for water and labour. The reduction in the number of sprays was particularly beneficial to women who do some spraying and children who collect water and assist in spraying. The increasing adoption rate of Bt cotton appears to have a health benefit measured in terms of reported rates of accidental insecticide poisoning. These appear to be declining as the uptake of Bt cotton increases. However, the understanding of refugia and their management by local farmers are deficient and need improving. Finally, Bt cotton growers emerge as more resilient in absorbing price fluctuations.
Resumo:
The study reported presents the findings relating to commercial growing of genetically-modified Bt cotton in South Africa by a large sample of smallholder farmers over three seasons (1998/99, 1999/2000, 2000/01) following adoption. The analysis presents constructs and compares groupwise differences for key variables in Bt v. non-Bt technology and uses regressions to further analyse the production and profit impacts of Bt adoption. Analysis of the distribution of benefits between farmers due to the technology is also presented. In parallel with these socio-economic measures, the toxic loads being presented to the environment following the introduction of Bt cotton are monitored in terms of insecticide active ingredient (ai) and the Biocide Index. The latter adjusts ai to allow for differing persistence and toxicity of insecticides. Results show substantial and significant financial benefits to smallholder cotton growers of adopting Bt cotton over three seasons in terms of increased yields, lower insecticide spray costs and higher gross margins. This includes one particularly wet, poor growing season. In addition, those with the smaller holdings appeared to benefit proportionately more from the technology (in terms of higher gross margins) than those with larger holdings. Analysis using the Gini-coefficient suggests that the Bt technology has helped to reduce inequality amongst smallholder cotton growers in Makhathini compared to what may have been the position if they had grown conventional cotton. However, while Bt growers applied lower amounts of insecticide and had lower Biocide Indices (per ha) than growers of non-Bt cotton, some of this advantage was due to a reduction in non-bollworm insecticide. Indeed, the Biocide Index for all farmers in the population actually increased with the introduction of Bt cotton. The results indicate the complexity of such studies on the socio-economic and environmental impacts of GM varieties in the developing world.
Resumo:
Cotton production in the European Union (EU) is limited to areas of Greece and Southern Spain (Andalusia). The 2004 reform of the EU cotton policy severely affected the profitability of the crop. In this article we analyze how the introduction of genetically modified (GM), insect-resistant cotton varieties (Bt cotton) might help EU cotton farmers to increase profitability and therefore face the cotton policy reform. We first study farmers’ attitudes toward adoption of Bt cotton varieties through a survey conducted in Andalusia (Southern Spain). The results show a positive attitude of Andalusian cotton farmers toward the Bt cotton varieties. Second, we perform an ex-ante analysis of the effects of introducing Bt cotton in Andalusia. Finally, we integrate the analysis of the effects of Bt cotton with the analysis of the EU cotton reform. Our results show that despite the significant economic benefits of Bt cotton, the current policy reform is likely to jeopardize the profitability of cotton production in the EU.
Resumo:
The farm-level success of Bt-cotton in developing countries is well documented. However, the literature has only recently begun to recognise the importance of accounting for the effects of the technology on production risk, in addition to the mean effect estimated by previous studies. The risk effects of the technology are likely very important to smallholder farmers in the developing world due to their risk-aversion. We advance the emergent literature on Bt-cotton and production risk by using panel data methods to control for possible endogeneity of Bt-adoption. We estimate two models, the first a fixed-effects version of the Just and Pope model with additive individual and time effects, and the second a variation of the model in which inputs and variety choice are allowed to affect the variance of the time effect and its correlation with the idiosyncratic error. The models are applied to panel data on smallholder cotton production in India and South Africa. Our results suggest a risk-reducing effect of Bt-cotton in India, but an inconclusive picture in South Africa.
Resumo:
The economic benefits of Genetically Modified (GM) crops in developing countries have been well documented, but little research has been undertaken to date on the impacts of GM adoption on household livelihoods. The research reported here aimed to assess the livelihood impacts of the adoption of Bt cotton in South Africa., and involved 100 interviews of resource-poor farmers growing Bt cotton in Makhathini Flats, South Africa. Some 88% of respondents reported a higher income from Bt compared to non-Bt varieties previously grown by them, and this higher income was used primarily for greater education of their children (76%), more investment in growing cotton (46%), repaying debt (28%), investment in other crops (20%) and spending money on themselves. Some 89% had increased their asset base due to Bt cotton, primarily by increasing their cultivable land. These benefits of Bt adoption appeared widespread regardless of gender or farm size.
Resumo:
The present paper explores the 'farmer' effect in economic advantages often claimed for Bt cotton varieties (those with the endotoxin gene from Bacillus thuringiensis conferring resistance to some insect pests) compared to non-Bt varieties. Critics claim that much of the yield advantage of Bt cotton could be due to the fact that farmers adopting the technology are in a better position to provide inputs and management and so much of any claimed Bt advantage is an artefact rather than reflecting a real advantage of the variety per se. The present paper provides an in-depth analysis of 63 non-adopting and 94 adopting households of Bt cotton in Jalgaon, Maharashtra State, India, spanning the seasons 2002 and 2003. Results suggest that Bt adopters are indeed different from non-adopters in a number of ways. Adopters appear to specialize more on cotton (at least in terms of the land area they devote to the crop), spend more money on irrigation and grow well-performing non-Bt varieties of cotton (Bunny). Taking gross margin as the basis for comparison, Bt plots had 2.5 times the gross margin of non-Bt plots in both seasons. If only adopters are considered then the gross margin advantage of Bt plots reduces to 1.6 times that of non-Bt plots. This is still a significant advantage and could well explain the popularity of Bt in Maharashtra. However, it is clear that great care needs to be taken with such comparative studies.
Resumo:
Critics of genetically modified (GM) crops often contend that their introduction enhances the gap between rich and poor farmers, as the former group are in the best position to afford the expensive seed as well as provide other inputs such as fertilizer and irrigation. The research reported in this paper explores this issue with regard to Bt cotton (cotton with the endotoxtin gene from Bacillus thuringiensis conferring resistance to some insect pests) in Jalgaon, Maharashtra State, India, spanning the 2002 and 2003 seasons. Questionnaire–based survey results from 63 non–adopting and 94 adopting households of Bt cotton were analyzed, spanning 137 Bt cotton plots and 95 non–Bt cotton plots of both Bt adopters and non–adopters. For these households, cotton income accounted for 85 to 88% of total household income, and is thus of vital importance. Results suggest that in 2003 Bt adopting households have significantly more income from cotton than do non–adopting households (Rp 66,872 versus Rp 46,351) but inequality in cotton income, measured with the Gini coefficient (G), was greater amongst non–adopters than adopters. While Bt adopters had greater acreage of cotton in 2003 (9.92 acres versus 7.42 for non–adopters), the respective values of G were comparable. The main reason for the lessening of inequality amongst adopters would appear to be the consistency in the performance of Bt cotton along with the preferred non–Bt cultivar of Bt adopters—Bunny. Taking gross margin as the basis for comparison, Bt plots had 2.5 times the gross margin of non–Bt plots of non–adopters, while the advantage of Bt plots over non–Bt plots of adopters was 1.6 times. Measured in terms of the Gini coefficient of gross margin/acre it was apparent that inequality was lessened with the adoption of Bunny (G = 0.47) and Bt (G = 0.3) relative to all other non–Bt plots (G = 0.63). Hence the issue of equality needs to be seen both in terms of differences between adopters and non–adopters as well as within each of the groups.