Inequality and GM crops: a case study of Bt cotton in India

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.

Patents and transgenic plants

One of the recurring themes in any discussion concerning the application of genetic transformation technology is the role of Intellectual Property Rights (IPR). This term covers both the content of patents and the confidential expertise, usually related to methodology and referred to as “Trade Secrets”. This review will explain the concepts behind patent protection, and will discuss the wide-ranging scope of existing patents that cover all aspects of transgenic technology, from selectable markers and novel promoters to methods of gene introduction. Although few of these patents have any significant commercial value, there are a small number of key patents that may restrict the “freedom to operate” of any company seeking to exploit the methods. Over the last twenty years, these restrictions have forced extensive cross-licensing between ag-biotech companies and have been one of the driving forces behind the consolidation of these companies. Although such issues are often considered to be of little interest to the academic scientist working in the public sector, they are of great importance in any debate about the role of “public-good breeding” and of the relationship between the public and private sectors.

Review: intellectual property aspects of plant transformation

One of the recurring themes of the debates concerning the application of genetic transformation technology has been the role of Intellectual Property Rights (IPR). This term covers both the content of patents and the confidential expertise usually related to methodology and referred to as 'Trade Secrets'. This review explains the concepts behind patent protection, and discusses the wide-ranging scope of existing patents that cover all aspects of transgenic technology, from selectable markers and novel promoters to methods of gene introduction. Although few of the patents in this area have any real commercial value, there are a small number of key patents that restrict the 'freedom to operate' of new companies seeking to exploit the methods. Over the last 20 years, these restrictions have forced extensive cross-licensing between ag-biotech companies and have been one of the driving forces behind the consolidation of these companies. Although such issues are often considered of little interest to the academic scientist working in the public sector, they are of great importance in any discussion of the role of 'public-good breeding' and of the relationship between the public and private sectors.

Distribution of nutrients in the root zone affects yield, quality and blossom end rot of tomato fruits

Tomato plants (Lycopersicon esculentum Mill. 'DRK') were grown hydroponically in two experiments to determine the effects of nutrient concentration and distribution in the root zone on yield, quality and blossom end rot (BER). The plants were grown in rockwool with their root systems divided into two portions. Each portion was irrigated with nutrient solutions with either the same or different electrical conductivity (EC) in the range 0 to 6 dS m(-1). In both experiments, fruit yields decreased as EC increased from moderate to high when solutions of equal concentration were applied to both portions of the root system. However, higher yields were obtained when a solution with high EC was applied to one portion of the root system and a solution of low EC to the other portion. For example, the fresh weight of mature fruits in the 6/6 treatment was only 20% that of the 3/3 treatment but the 6/0 treatment had a yield that was 40% higher. The reduction in yield in the high EC treatments was due to an increase in the number of fruits with BER and smaller fruit size. BER increased from 12% to 88% of total fruits as EC increased from 6/0 to 6/6 and fruit length decreased from 67 mm to 52 mm. Fruit quality (expressed as titratable acidity and soluble solids) increased as EC increased. In summary, high yields of high quality tomatoes with minimal incidence of BER were obtained when one portion of the root system was supplied with a solution of high EC and the other portion with a solution of moderate or zero EC.

Patents for plants: context and current status

One of the important themes in any discussion concerning the application of genetic transformation technology in horticulture or elsewhere is the role of Intellectual Property Rights (IPR). This term covers both the content of patents and the confidential expertise, usually related to methodology and referred to as “Trade Secrets”. This review will explain the concepts behind patent protection, and will discuss the wide-ranging scope of existing patents that cover novel genotypes of plants as well as all aspects of transgenic technology, from selectable markers and novel promoters to methods of gene introduction. Although few of these patents have any significant commercial value there are a small number of key patents that may restrict the “freedom to operate” of any company seeking to exploit the methods in the production of transgenic varieties. Over the last twenty years, these restrictions have forced extensive cross-licensing between ag-biotech companies and have been one of the driving forces behind the consolidation of these companies. Although such issues may have limited relevance in the horticultural sector, and are often considered to be of little interest to the academic scientist working in the public sector, they are of great importance in any debate about the role of “public-good breeding” and of the relationship between the public and private sectors.

Farm level impact of Bt cotton in South Africa

This paper describes the method and findings of the first independent survey of smallholder farmers in the Republic of South Africa designed to explore the economic benefits of their adoption of Bt cotton. The study found that the Bt variety generally resulted in a per hectare increase in yields, value of output and reduction of pesticide costs which outweighed the increase in seed costs to give a substantial increase in gross margins. There are several surveys being carried out at the moment on different aspects of the Makhathini experience. The Monitor will be reporting on their results as these become available.