Washington, DC
January 21, 2009
Biotechnology has the potential to
substantially increase agricultural productivity, influence
markets, and in some cases invent new uses for traditional
crops. However, concerns accompany these potential benefits. A
group of scientists from Virginia examined the benefits, costs,
and risks associated with agricultural products arising from
biotechnology research.
With funding from USDA’s
Cooperative State Research, Education, and Extension Service
(CSREES), George Norton and colleagues at Virginia Polytechnic
Institute focused their study on two crops: tobacco and
rice. They chose tobacco because research is underway to
discover pharmaceutical uses for the crop. Rice was chosen
because it is the subject of a large biotechnology program, with
significant implications for U.S. producers, as well as for
producers and low-income consumers in the developing world.
Norton’s team assessed the costs and benefits of biotechnologies
using economic models. Analyses for tobacco focused on three
pharmaceutical products: glucerebrosidase (an enzyme for
treating Gaucher Disease), human serum albumin (used as a
substitute for blood plasma during surgery), and secretory IgA
antibody (important in preventing tooth decay). The project team
determined that pharmaceutical companies and patent holders
would benefit from biotechnology research in tobacco crops, but
the outcome for farmers and the public would be limited.
A world trade model was used to project the economic
consequences of Asia and the United States implementing
biotechnology to adopt cost-reducing genetically modified rice.
The model considered the potential impacts of insect-, drought-,
and herbicide-resistant genetically modified rice technologies.
Projected total benefits from these three technologies was
around $2 billion per year, but varied regionally; Asian
countries benefited from genetically modified rice, while the
United States experienced a small net loss.
Using a telephone survey, the project team assessed the
perceived social impact from genetically modified crops,
specifically insect-resistant rice and pharmaceutical-producing
tobacco. Results suggest most people had strong feelings,
positive or negative, toward biotechnologies. Willingness to
support genetically modified crops varied with the levels of
benefits—consumer support was greater for plant-based
pharmaceuticals than for genetically modified food products.
Focus groups in the United States, the Philippines, and
Bangladesh elicited stakeholder views or concerns about the
potential benefits and costs of obtaining pharmaceutical
products from genetically modified crops. The focus group also
interviewed tobacco manufacturers, tobacco and rice producers,
private biotech firms, environmentalists, government regulators,
clergy, students, World Bank representatives, university and
government researchers, and consumers. The project team found
most citizens of Asian countries were unaware of biotechnology
risk or benefit. U.S. farmers are open to the idea of
genetically modified crops, but fear a backlash that could
negatively affect crop prices.
Educational materials and fact sheets with more details about
project findings are available at
http://www.agecon.vt.edu/biotechimpact/.
This project provides beneficial information about the public’s
view of genetically modified agricultural crops in the United
States and abroad. It also explored impacts on these crops of
U.S policies and regulations, and provides greater clarity on
the appropriate roles of the public versus the private sector in
biotechnology research and development.
CSREES funded this research through the Initiative for Future
Agricultural and Food Systems program. Through federal funding
and leadership for research, education and extension programs,
CSREES focuses on investing in science and solving critical
issues affecting people’s daily lives and the nation’s future.
For more information, visit
www.csrees.usda.gov.
By Stacy Kish |
|
