An economic cost-benefit analysis of GM crop cultivation: An Irish case study

AgBioForum

Volumn 7, Issue 4, 2004, Pages 149-157

  Flannery, Marie Louise ^a   Thorne, Fiona S ^b   Kelly, Paul W ^b   Mullins, Ewen ^a  

^a TEAGASC   (Ireland)

^b Rural Economy Research Centre Ireland   (Ireland)

Author keywords

Cost benefit analysis; Genetically modified crops; GM; Ireland

Indexed keywords

EID: 25444515412     PISSN: 1522936X     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Article

References (37)

1. Alston, J.M, Hyde, J., Marra, M.C., & Mitchell, P.D. (2002). An ex ante analysis of the benefits from the adoption of corn rootworm resistant transgenic corn technology. AgBioForum, 5(3), 71-84. Available on the World Wide Web: http://www.agbioforum.org.
2. Bhat, R.V., & Miller, J.D. (2004). Mycotoxins and food supply. Rome: Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations. Available on the World Wide Web: http://www.fao.org/docrep/U3550t/u3550t0e.htm.
3. Brants, I., & Harms, H. (1998). Herbicide tolerant sugar beet. Proceedings of 61st Congress of the Institut International de Recherches Betteravières, 195-204.
4. Commission of the European Communities. (2000). Economic impacts of genetically modified crops on the agri-food sector. Brussels: CEC Directorate-General for Agriculture. Available on the World Wide Web: http://europa.eu.int/comm/agriculture/publi/gmo/fullrep/ackn.htm.
5. Connolly, L., Kinsella, A., & Quinlan, G. (2004). National farm survey 2003. Dublin: Teagasc.
6. Copeland, R.B., Dowley, L.J., & Moore, J.F. (1993). Vulnerability of the Irish potato industry to harmful organisms. In J.A. Kavanagh and P. Brennan (Eds.), Proceedings of the Royal Irish Academy seminar (pp. 95-106).
7. Demont, M., & Tollens, E. (2004a). Ex ante welfare effects of agricultural biotechnology in the European Union: The case of transgenic herbicide tolerant sugarbeet. In R.E. Evenson & V. Santaniello (Eds.), The regulation of agricultural biotechnology (pp. 239-255). Wallingford, UK: CABI Publishing.
8. Demont, M., & Tollens, E. (2004b). First impact of biotechnology in the EU: Bt maize adoption in Spain. Annals of Applied Biology, 145, 197-207.
9. Demont, M., Wessler, J. &,Tollens, E. (2004). Biodiversity versus transgenic sugar beet: the one euro question. European Review of Agricultural Economics, 31, 1-18.
10. Dowley, L.J., Leonard, R., Rice, B., & Ward, S. (2001). Low input fungicide programmes for the control of late blight in potatoes. Oak Park, Carlow, Ireland: Teagasc Crops Research Centre. Available on the World Wide Web: http://www.teagasc.ie/research/reports/crops/4312/eopr-4312.htm.
11. Fernandez-Cornejo, J., Daberkow, S., & McBride, W.D. (2001). Decomposing the size effect on the adoption of innovations: Agrobiotechnology and precision agriculture. AgBioForum, 4(2), 124-136. Available on the World Wide Web: http://www.agbioforum.org.
12. Fulton, M., & Keyowski, L. (1999). The producer benefits of herbicide-resistant canola. AgBioForum, 2(2), 85-93. Available on the World Wide Web: http://www.agbioforum.org.
13. Gianessi L.P., Sankula S., & Reigner N. (2003). Plant biotechnology: Potential impact for improving pest management in European agriculture. Potato case study. Washington, DC: National Center for Food and Agricultural Policy. Available on the World Wide Web: http://www.ncfap.org.
14. Kalaitzandonakes, N.G. (2003). The economic and environmental impacts of agbiotech: An introduction. In N.G. Kalaitzandonakes (Ed.), The Economic and environmental impacts of agbiotech (pp.1-18). New York: Kluwer Academic.
15. Kniss, A.R., Wilson, R.G., Martin, A.R., Burgener, P.A., & Feuz, D.M. (2004). Economic evaluation of glyphosate-resistant and conventional sugar beet. Weed Technology, 18, 388-396.
16. Magen, H., & Imas, P. (2004, February). Potential impact of crop diversification and biotechnological inventions on the use of micronutrients. IFA International Symposium On Micronutrients, New Delhi, India. Available on the World Wide Web: http://www.fertilizer.org/ifa/publicat/PDF/ 2004_ag_new_delhi_magen.pdf.
17. May, M. (2000). Efficiency and selectivity of RR and LL weed control techniques compared to classical weed control systems. Proceedings of 63rd Congress of the Institut International de Recherches Betteravières, 163-170.
18. May, M.J. (2003). Economic consequences for UK farmers of growing GM herbicide tolerant sugar beet. Annals of Applied Biology, 142, 41-48.
19. Mitchell, B. (2000). Weed control in glyphosate tolerant sugar beet (EOPR 4483). Oak Park, Carlow, Ireland: Teagasc Publications.
20. Mitchell, B. (2002). Crop protection: The scourge of weed beet 13:50:26. The Farmers Journal Interactive. Available on the World Wide Web: http://www.farmersjournal.ie/cropprotectionsite/weedbeet.html.
21. Moll, S. (1997). Commercial experience and benefits from glyphosate tolerant crops. Proceedings of the BCPC Conference Weeds, 3, 931-940.
22. O'Mahony, J. (2002). Crop costs and returns. Oak Park, Carlow, Ireland: Teagasc.
23. O'Mahony, J. (2003). Crop costs and returns. Oak Park, Carlow, Ireland: Teagasc.
24. O'Mahony, J. (2004). Sugar beet: Control of weed beet and bolters. Oak Park, Carlow, Ireland: Teagasc.
25. O'Sullivan, E. (2004). Cereal diseases and fungicide resistance. In National Tillage Conference proceedings 2004 (pp. 70-78). Oak Park, Carlow, Ireland: Teagasc Crops Research Centre. Available on the World Wide Web: http://www.teagasc.ie/publications/2004/20040128/ tillageconferenceproceedings2004.pdf.
26. PG Economics. (2003). Consultancy support for the analysis of the impact of GM crops on UK farm profitability. Dorchester, Dorset, UK: PG Economics Ltd. Available on the World Wide Web: http://www.pgeconomics.co.uk/pdf/ Cabinet_Office_GM_Crops.pdf.
27. Teagasc. (2002). Farm management data handbook. Dublin: Teagasc.
28. Teagasc. (2003). Farm management data handbook. Dublin: Teagasc.
29. Tenning, P. (1998). Transgenic herbicide tolerant sugar beet: Present status and future developments. Aspects of Applied Biology, 52, 273-278.
30. Tolstrup, K., Andersen, S.B., Boelt, B., Buus, M., Gylling, M., Holm, P.B., et al. (2003). Report from the Danish Working Group on the co-existence of genetically modifed crops with conventional and organic crops. Tjele, Denmark: Danish Institute of Agricultural Sciences. Available on the World Wide Web: http://web.agrsci.dk/gmcc-03/Co_exist_rapport.pdf.
31. United States General Accounting Office. (2000). Biotechnology: Information on prices of genetically modified seeds in the United States and Argentina (GAO/RCED/NSIAD-00-55). Washington, DC: US General Accounting Office. Available on the World Wide Web: http://www.gao.gov/new.items/r400055.pdf.
32. van Meijl, H., & van Tongeren, F. (2003, August). International diffusion of gains from biotechnology and the European Union's Common Agricultural Policy. Paper presented at the 25th International Conference of Agricultural Economists, Durban, South Africa. Available on the World Wide Web: http://www.iaae-agecon.org/conf/durban_papers/papers/064.pdf.
33. Wauters, A., Hermann, O., & Gestat de Garambe, T. (2000). Performances de variétés avec désherbage traditionnel ou spécifique; critères et seuil acceptable. Proceedings of 63rd Congress of the Institut International de Recherches Betteravières, 171-178.
34. Wevers, J.D.A. (1998a). Agronomic and environmental aspects of herbicide resistant sugar beet in the Netherlands. Aspects of Applied Biology, 52, 393-399.
35. Wevers, J. (1998b). The environmental contamination of weed control in transgenic herbicide resistant sugar beet. Proceedings of 61st Congress of the Institut International de Recherches Betteravières, 365-368.
36. Wilson, R.G. (1999). Response of nine sugarbeet (Beta vulgaris) cultivars to post-emergence herbicide applications. Weed Technology, 13, 25-29.
37. Wilson, R.G., Dean Yonts, C., & Smith, J.A. (2002). Influence of glyphosate and glufosinate on weed control and sugar beet (Beta vulgaris) yield in herbicide tolerant sugar beet. Weed Technology, 16, 66-73.