Brussels, Belgium
February 26, 2009
The Friends of the Earth (FoE)
report is entitled “Who
Benefits from GM Crops?” and was timed released on 10
February 2009.
As far as EuropaBio is
concerned, the answer to that question is two-fold:
1. Economically: we all benefit
2. The environment benefits
1. Economic benefit
A recent publication, GM Crops in Europe: How Much Value and for
Whom? (Demont et al., 2007) shows that - as a global rule of
thumb - two thirds of the benefits of GM crops are shared among
farmers and consumers, while one third goes to gene developers
and suppliers. Farmers get a direct profit from growing GM crops
via higher yields and lower crop protection product use. There
is also an economic advantage for consumers, because of lower
prices.
If farmers did not benefit from the technology, then why has the
increase in biotech crops every year represented a double
percent point change year on year since the technology was
introduced?
2. Environmental benefit
2.1. GM crops lead to a decrease in pesticide use
In fact, biotech varieties have dramatically reduced farmers’
reliance on plant protection products.
There is now experience from 10 years of large-scale commercial
cultivation of transgenic crops. Lots of data indicate that
there is a decrease in the amounts of plant protection products
applied to these crops.
This was one of the conclusions of a recent large project
(2002-2006) ‘Impact of transgenic crop cultivation on the use of
agrochemicals and its environmental consequences’, under the
supervision of the International Union for Pure and Applied
Chemistry (IUPAC). The project made an inventory of altered
agrochemical use per hectare of transgenic crops compared with
conventional crops by collecting data from public sources,
including scientific literature and reports published by
dedicated institutions. The results have been published in a
recent and very
comprehensive article by Kleter et al. (2007).
A. Lower Herbicide* use
in Herbicide-resistant crops
Several large studies in the US, for example by the Economic
Research Service (USDA-ERS) (Fernandez Cornejo et al.,
2007), come to the same conclusion: there is lower herbicide
use in herbicide-resistant crops. A recent report by the
National Center for Food and Agricultural Policy (NCFAP)
(Sankula et al., 2005) is showing substantial 25-33 %
decreases in the use of agrochemicals for herbicide
resistant crops (canola, cotton, maize and soybean) compared
to their conventional counterparts.
In Europe, data from field trials have clearly demonstrated
lower herbicide use in several glyphosate-resistant crops.
In sugar beets, for example, the number of herbicide
applications in glyphosate-resistant varieties could be
halved, compared to their conventional counterparts (Kleter
et al., in press).
The only exception is herbicide-resistant soybean in
Romania, where a slight increase (5%) of herbicide use was
found. But this resulted in better weed control and hence
increased yields. The increase related to the comparatively
low average use of conventional herbicides before the
herbicide tolerant technology was available
which itself was due to financial constraints faced by
farmers.
B. Lower Insecticide** use in Bt crops
US figures continuously indicate a decrease in insecticide
sprays in Bt crops. For insect-resistant crops expressing
two Cry-proteins, the estimated reduction in pesticides is
most outspoken. As for Bt cotton, a nationwide survey
carried out in India in 2003 indicated that the farmers were
able to obtain on average a reduction in chemical sprays by
60%, and a yield increase by about 29% due to effective
control of bollworms, as compared to non-Bt cotton. Similar
trends and benefits had been reported from other countries
also.
For France, it was estimated that the 22,000 ha of Bt maize
cultivated in 2007 allowed for saving up to 8 800 litres of
insecticide sprays (Orama report, 2007).
2.2. Environmental impact
decreases in transgenic crops
To predict the environmental impact of pesticides used on
transgenic crops, data on the quantities of pesticides used need
to be combined with data on their environmental and
toxicological properties. A universal indicator, the
‘environmental impact quotient’ (EIQ), was employed in the
studies by Kleter et al., indicating that the environmental
impact decreases upon the adoption of transgenic crops, which
can be more pronounced than just the reduction of active
ingredients applied to the crops.
Furthermore, transgenic crops may also have an impact on the
environment through secondary effects. For example the
introduction of GM soybeans in the USA is correlated with an
increase in reduced or no-tillage activities, which is
beneficial for erosion-sensitive soils (Kleter et al., 2007) and
which may lead to a substantial
reduction in CO2 output and farm energy needs (Fawcett and
Towery, 2002).
* Herbicide: Agent used for weed control
** Insecticide: Agent used for insect control
References
Carpenter J, Felsot A, Goode T, Hammig M, Onstad D and Sankula
S, Comparative Environmental Effects of Biotechnology-Derived
and Traditional Soybean, Corn and Cotton Crops, Council for
Agricultural Science and Technology, Ames, IA (2002).
Demont, M., K. Dillen, and E. Tollens, 2007. "GM crops in
Europe: How much value and for whom?" EuroChoices, 6(3):46-53.
Fawcett R, Towery D (2002) Conservation tillage and plant
biotechnology: how new technologies can improve the environment
by reducing the need to plow. Available:
http://croplife.intraspin.com/BioTech/paper.asp?id=63
Fernandez Cornejo J and Caswell M, The First Decade of
Genetically Engineered Crops in the United States. [Online].
United States Department of Agriculture, Economic Research
Service, Washington, DC (2006). Available:
http://www.ers.usda.gov/publications/EIB11 [17 February
2007].
Fernandez-Cornejo J and McBride WD, Adoption of
BioengineeredCrops. [Online]. Agricultural Economic Report No.
(AER810), United States Department of Agriculture, Economic
Research Service, Washington, DC (2002). Available:
http://www.ers.usda.gov/publications/aer810/ [17 February
2007].
Kleter GA, Bhula R, Bodnaruk K, Carazo E, Felsot AS, Harris CA,
et al, Altered pesticide use on transgenic crops and the
associated general impact from an environmental perspective.
Pest Manag Sci 53:1107–1115 (2007a).
Kleter GA, Harris C, Stephenson, G Unsworth, J, 2007. Comparison
of herbicide regimes and the associated potential environmental
effects of glyphosate-resistant crops versus what they replace
in Europe. Pest Manag Sci (in press).
Orama report (2007) GM Maize in the field: conclusive results
http://www.agpm.com/en/iso_album/technical_results_btmaize_2006.pdf
Sankula S, Marmon G and Blumenthal E, Biotechnology-DerivedCrops
Planted in 2004 – Impacts on US Agriculture. [Online]. National
Center for Food and Agricultural Policy, Washington, DC (2005).
Available:
http://www.ncfap.org/whatwedo/pdf/2004biotechimpacts.pdf [25
November 2006]. |
|
