An evidence-based review on the likely economic and environmental impact of genetically modified cereals and oilseeds for UK agriculture

An evidence-based review of the potential impact that the introduction of genetically-modified (GM) cereal and oilseed crops could have for the UK was carried out. The inter-disciplinary research project addressed the key research questions using scenarios for the uptake, or not, of GM technologies. This was followed by an extensive literature review, stakeholder consultation and financial modelling. The world area of canola, oilseed rape (OSR) low in both erucic acid in the oil and glucosinolates in the meal, was 34M ha in 2012 of which 27% was GM; Canada is the lead producer but it is also grown in the USA, Australia and Chile. Farm level effects of adopting GM OSR include: lower production costs; higher yields and profits; and ease of farm management. Growing GM OSR instead of conventional OSR reduces both herbicide usage and environmental impact. Some 170M ha of maize was grown in the world in 2011 of which 28% was GM; the main producers are the USA, China and Brazil. Spain is the main EU producer of GM maize although it is also grown widely in Portugal. Insect resistant (IR) and herbicide tolerant (HT) are the GM maize traits currently available commercially. Farm level benefits of adopting GM maize are lower costs of production through reduced use of pesticides and higher profits. GM maize adoption results in less pesticide usage than on conventional counterpart crops leading to less residues in food and animal feed and allowing increasing diversity of bees and other pollinators. In the EU, well-tried coexistence measures for growing GM crops in the proximity of conventional crops have avoided gene flow issues. Scientific evidence so far seems to indicate that there has been no environmental damage from growing GM crops. They may possibly even be beneficial to the environment as they result in less pesticides and herbicides being applied and improved carbon sequestration from less tillage. A review of work on GM cereals relevant for the UK found input trait work on: herbicide and pathogen tolerance; abiotic stress such as from drought or salinity; and yield traits under different field conditions. For output traits, work has mainly focussed on modifying the nutritional components of cereals and in connection with various enzymes, diagnostics and vaccines. Scrutiny of applications submitted for field trial testing of GM cereals found around 9000 applications in the USA, 15 in Australia and 10 in the EU since 1996. There have also been many patent applications and granted patents for GM cereals in the USA for both input and output traits;an indication of the scale of such work is the fact that in a 6 week period in the spring of 2013, 12 patents were granted relating to GM cereals. A dynamic financial model has enabled us to better understand and examine the likely performance of Bt maize and HT OSR for the south of the UK, if cultivation is permitted in the future. It was found that for continuous growing of Bt maize and HT OSR, unless there was pest pressure for the former and weed pressure for the latter, the seed premia and likely coexistence costs for a buffer zone between other crops would reduce the financial returns for the GM crops compared with their conventional counterparts. When modelling HT OSR in a four crop rotation, it was found that gross margins increased significantly at the higher levels of such pest or weed pressure, particularly for farm businesses with larger fields where coexistence costs would be scaled down. The impact of the supply of UK-produced GM crops on the wider supply chain was examined through an extensive literature review and widespread stakeholder consultation with the feed supply chain. The animal feed sector would benefit from cheaper supplies of raw materials if GM crops were grown and, in the future, they might also benefit from crops with enhanced nutritional profile (such as having higher protein levels) becoming available. This would also be beneficial to livestock producers enabling lower production costs and higher margins. Whilst coexistence measures would result in increased costs, it is unlikely that these would cause substantial changes in the feed chain structure. Retailers were not concerned about a future increase in the amount of animal feed coming from GM crops. To conclude, we (the project team) feel that the adoption of currently available and appropriate GM crops in the UK in the years ahead would benefit farmers, consumers and the feed chain without causing environmental damage. Furthermore, unless British farmers are allowed to grow GM crops in the future, the competitiveness of farming in the UK is likely to decline relative to that globally.

The co-development of technology and new buildings: incorporating building integrated photovoltaics

Current approaches for the reduction of carbon emissions in buildings are often predicated on the integration of renewable technologies into building projects. Building integrated photovoltaics (BIPV) is one of these technologies and brings its own set of challenges and problems with a resulting mutual articulation of this technology and the building. A Social Construction of Technology (SCOT) approach explores how negotiations between informal groups of project actors with shared interests shape the ongoing specification of both BIPV and the building. Six main groups with different interests were found to be involved in the introduction of BIPV (Cost Watchers, Design Aesthetes, Green Guardians, Design Optimizers, Generation Maximizers and Users). Their involvement around three sets of issues (design changes from lack of familiarity with the technology, misunderstandings from unfamiliar interdependencies of trades and the effects of standard firm procedure) is followed. Findings underline how BIPV requires a level of integration that typically spans different work packages and how standard contractual structures inhibit the smooth incorporation of BIPV. Successful implementation is marked by ongoing (re-)design of both the building and the technology as informal fluid groups of project actors with shared interests address the succession of problems which arise in the process of implementation.

Towards a meta-analysis and toolkit for port-related socio-economic impacts: a review of socio-economic impact studies conducted for seaports

Port authorities increasingly need to communicate with a variety of external stakeholders in order to maintain and strengthen the societal acceptance of seaport activities. The availability of socio-economic impact studies on port authority and regional development agency websites has often made this information accessible to the public at large. However, the differences in methodologies adopted, in terms of selecting, defining and measuring various types of socio-economic impacts, sometimes lead to misconceptions as well as misleading comparisons across ports within and between regions. In this paper, we suggest guidelines for the design and application of a potential best practice from an interregional perspective (UK, France and Belgium), based on research in the framework of a European Commission co-funded project, ‘IMPACTE’. The paper also aims to develop guidelines for comparing the socio-economic impacts of ports across regional and national borders and discusses the development of a European port economic impact measurement toolkit. We analyse a sample of 33 recent socio-economic impact assessment reports in terms of methodologies adopted and types of impacts measured. The review shows a great diversity among these studies, leading to important differences between the impacts of port activity communicated to stakeholders.