Genetically modified crops in Africa: Economic and policy lessons from countries south of the Sahara

Abstract

established in 1975, provides evidence-based policy solutions to sustainably end hunger and malnutrition and reduce poverty. The Institute conducts research, communicates results, optimizes partnerships, and builds capacity to ensure sustainable food production, promote healthy food systems, improve markets and trade, transform agriculture, build resilience, and strengthen institutions and governance. Gender is considered in all of the Institute's work. IFPRI collaborates with partners around the world, including development implementers, public institutions, the private sector, and farmers' organizations, to ensure that local, national, regional, and global food policies are based on evidence. Tables, Figures, and Boxes Tables I.1 Regulatory status of genetically engineered crops in the regulatory and development pipeline, 2009 1.1 Estimated area and share of total area planted to transgenic cotton in South Africa, 2000/2001-2007/08 1.2 Summary of findings of main published studies 1.3 Estimated area and share of total area planted to genetically modified maize in South Africa, 2000/2001-2009/10 2.1 Maize and beer consumption and fumonisin exposure (probable daily intake) 2.2 Fumonisin (FB 1) levels in maize and maize products in South Africa 2.3 Possible government interventions and their potential impact 2.4 Percentage of smallholder farmers using purchased seed, by region, 2001 2.5 Comparison of total fumonisin levels in maize in rural KwaZulu-Natal, 2004-2007 (mg/kg = ppb) 2.6 Fumonisin exposure in the Eastern Cape with Bt maize adoption 3.1 Organic cotton production, 1999-2008 3.2 Assumptions for variables and distributions used for partial budget simulations 3.3 Descriptive statistics 3.4 Descriptive statistics of main variables, control of plot 3.5 Cotton profitability for low-and high-input systems, season 2007/08 3.6 Cotton profitability for conventional and organic cotton producers, 2007/08 season 3.7 Partial budgets for scenarios using genetically modified seed 3A.1 All sample (N = 151) 3A.2 Low-input producer (N = 124) 3A.3 High-input producer (N = 27) 3A.4 Conventional producer (N = 139) 3A.5 Organic producer (N = 12) 4.1 Hurdle rates and average annual MISTICs per hectare of genetically modified bananas, per household, and per bananagrowing farm household at different risk-free rates of return and risk-adjusted rates of return 4.2 Comparison of KAP scores with consumer characteristics 4.3 Random-parameter logit model with interactions 4.4 Segment-specific valuation of banana bunch attributes (percentage change in price per banana bunch) 4.5 Compensating surplus and 95 percent confidence intervals for four bunch options a 5.1 GM (genetically modified) crops and products included in the Regional Approach to Biotechnology and Biosafety Policy in Eastern and Southern Africa project 5.2 Immediate export losses if all European importers shunned all "possibly GM" or "possibly GM-tainted" products 6.1 Social costs of biosafety regulations 6.2 Estimates of cost of applications over time (US dollars) and pro...

Foregone benefits of important food crop improvements in Sub-Saharan Africa

“…In Uganda, field trials with black sigatoka (also known as black leaf streak) resistant matoke (cooking banana) started in 2007 [ 21 ]. A bacterial wilt resistant matoke is under development.…”

Defining biotechnological solutions for insect control in sub‐Saharan Africa

“…GM crops face strong opposition in most countries of the European Union and Japan (Smyth, ). Heated debates still continue in Africa, regarding whether GM crops will help alleviate food insecurity or whether the adoption of this technology could result in negative impacts (Falck‐Zepeda, Gruere, & Sithole‐Niag,). Consequently, African policymakers are hesitant to move forward with establishing biosafety laws and commercializing GM crops, largely due to risk perceptions and fears spread by anti‐biotech lobbying groups (Paarlberg, ).…”

Progress and Challenges for Implementation of the Common Market for Eastern and Southern Africa Policy on Biotechnology and Biosafety

“…The major concerns to adoption of GM crop technology have revolved around safety to humans and animals that would consume the end products, and plants and insects in the environments where the crops would be grown. In Africa, there is wide belief that GM crops are intended for use in the industrialized countries, and are hence inappropriate for agriculture as it is practiced in Africa (Falck-Zepeda et al, 2013a , b ). Second, with respect to trade there are concerns that GM crops would replace conventional varieties and thereby make farmers dependent on private seed companies.…”

“…These studies support the notion that on average, adoption would be profitable. However, it should be appreciated that results based on average measures do not provide the true picture since they mask variability in many conditions, such as agro-climates, host cultivars, and farming practices (Falck-Zepeda et al, 2013a , b ). This may be the reason many policymakers and farmers in Africa hesitate to fully embrace GM crops.…”

“…Agriculture remains the backbone of economic development in Africa. “Agriculture contributes approximately 35% of the continent’s GDP and accounts for 70% of its labor force” (Falck-Zepeda et al, 2013b ). For many years, African agriculture has been characterized by low productivity arising from little use of inputs and reliance on rainfall.…”