Sustainability of Current GM Crop Cultivation
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Sustainability of current GM crop cultivation Review of people, planet, profit effects of agricultural production of GM crops, based on the cases of soybean, maize, and cotton A.C. Franke, M.L.H. Breukers, W. Broer, F. Bunte, O. Dolstra, F.M. d’Engelbronner-Kolff, L.A.P. Lotz, J. van Montfort, J. Nikoloyuk, M.M. Rutten, M.J.M. Smulders, C.C.M. van de Wiel, M. van Zijl Report 386 Sustainability of current GM crop cultivation Review of people, planet, profit effects of agricultural production of GM crops, based on the cases of soybean, maize, and cotton A.C. Franke1, M.L.H. Breukers2, W. Broer3, F. Bunte2, O. Dolstra1, F.M. d’Engelbronner-Kolff4, L.A.P. Lotz1, J. van Montfort4, J. Nikoloyuk4, M.M. Rutten2, M.J.M. Smulders1, C.C.M. van de Wiel1, M. van Zijl3 1 Plant Research International (PRI), Wageningen UR, Wageningen, the Netherlands 2 LEI, Wageningen UR, the Hague, the Netherlands 3 CREM, Amsterdam, the Netherlands 4 Aidenvironment, Amsterdam, the Netherlands Plant Research International, part of Wageningen UR Report 386 April 2011 © 2011 Wageningen, Foundation Stichting Dienst Landbouwkundig Onderzoek (DLO) research institute Plant Research International. All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise, without the prior written permission of the DLO, Plant Research International. The Foundation DLO is not responsible for any damage caused by using the content of this report. Plant Research International, part of Wageningen UR Address : P.O. Box 616, 6700 AP Wageningen, The Netherlands : Wageningen Campus, Droevendaalsesteeg 1, Wageningen, The Netherlands Tel. : +31 317 48 60 01 Fax : +31 317 41 80 94 E-mail : [email protected] Internet : www.pri.wur.nl Table of contents page Abbreviations 1 Abstract 3 1. Introduction 5 1.1 Background 5 1.2 Methodology 5 1.2.1 Planet 7 1.2.2 Profit 9 1.2.3 People 12 2. Soybean 15 2.1 General characterization of cultivation and trade 15 2.2 Genetic modifications 16 2.2.1 Current events 16 2.2.2 Events in the commercial and regulatory pipeline 16 2.3 GM-related sustainability – Planet 17 2.3.1 Production efficiencies 17 2.3.2 Soil conservation 22 2.3.3 Water conservation 23 2.3.4 Biodiversity 24 2.3.5 Climate Change 25 2.4 GM-related sustainability – Profit 25 2.4.1 Farm income 25 2.4.2 National income 29 2.4.3 Economic welfare distribution 32 2.4.4 Financial and other risks 35 2.5 GM-related sustainability – People 37 2.5.1 Labour conditions 37 2.5.2 Land rights, community rights and rights of indigenous people 41 2.5.3 Freedom of choice 42 2.5.4 Competition with food production 44 2.5.5 Contribution to livelihoods of producers and local communities 45 3. Maize 49 3.1 General characterization of cultivation and trade 49 3.2 Genetic modification 51 3.2.1 Current events 51 3.2.2 Events in the commercial and regulatory pipeline 52 3.3 GM-related sustainability – Planet 52 3.3.1 Production efficiencies 52 3.3.2 Soil conservation 56 3.3.3 Water conservation 56 3.3.4 Biodiversity 56 3.3.5 Climate Change 58 3.4 GM-related sustainability – Profit 58 3.4.1 Farm income 58 3.4.2 National income 63 3.4.3 Economic welfare distribution 65 3.4.4 Financial and other risks 68 3.5 GM-related sustainability – People 70 3.5.1 Labour conditions 71 3.5.2 Land rights, community rights and rights of indigenous people 74 3.5.3 Freedom of choice 77 3.5.4 Competition with food production 79 3.5.5 Contribution to livelihoods of producers and local communities 81 4. Cotton 83 4.1 General characteristics of cultivation and trade 83 4.2 Genetic modifications 84 4.2.1 Current events 84 4.2.2 Events in the pipeline 85 4.3 GM related sustainability – Planet 85 4.3.1 Production efficiencies 86 4.3.2 Soil conservation 89 4.3.3 Water conservation 89 4.3.4 Biodiversity 90 4.3.5 Climate Change 90 4.4 GM-related sustainability – Profit 90 4.4.1 Farm income 91 4.4.2 National income 95 4.4.3 Economic welfare distribution 97 4.4.4 Financial and other risks 100 4.5 GM-related sustainability – People 102 4.5.1 Labour conditions 102 4.5.2 Land rights, community rights and rights of indigenous people 108 4.5.3 Freedom of choice 109 4.5.4 Competition with food production 113 4.5.5 Contribution to livelihoods of producers and local communities 115 5. Discussion 121 6. Conclusions 133 Acknowledgements 134 7. Literature 135 1 Abbreviations BCI Better Cotton Initiative Bt Bacillus thuringiensis (toxin) Canola CANadian Oil, Low Acid (oilseed rape low in erucic acid and glucosinolates) CAP Common Agricultural Policy (of the EU) CBS Centraal Bureau voor de Statistiek (Statistics Netherlands) CGE Computable General Equilibrium (modelling method for macro-economic analysis (see GTAP) CIMMYT International Maize and Wheat Improvement Center ECB European corn borer (Ostrinia nubilalis) EJF Environmental Justice Foundation EU European Union FAO Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations FAPRI Food and Agricultural Policy Research Institute (US) FSE Farm Scale Evaluations (large programme of field trials in UK assessing GM impacts on biodiversity) GAP Good Agricultural Practice GDP Gross Domestic Product GM Genetically Modified/Genetic Modification GMO Genetically Modified Organism GRI Global Report Initiative GTAP Global Trade Analysis Project (general equilibrium modelling of macro-economic effects) ha hectare HT herbicide-tolerant ICAR Indian Council for Agricultural Research IFA International Fertilizer Industry Association IFPRI International Food Policy Research Institute ILO International Labour Organization (of the UN) INTA Instituto Nacional de Tecnología Agropecuaria (Argentinian National Institute for Agricultural Technology) IPEC International Programme on the Elimination of Child Labour (of ILO) IPR Intellectual Property Rights IR insect resistant IRMA Insect-Resistant Maize for Africa programme ISAAA International Service for the Acquisition of Agri-biotech Applications LL Liberty Link® (glufosinate tolerant GM variant) LLP low level presence (of GM in non-GM products) MVO Productschap Margarine, Vetten en Oliën (Dutch Product Board for Margarine, Fats and Oils) NGO Non-Governmental Organization OECD Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development OPV Open-Pollinated Varieties R & D Research and Development ROW Rest Of the World RR Roundup Ready® (glyphosate-tolerant GM variant) RTRS Round Table for Responsible Soy SACU Southern Africa Customs Union SAM Social Accounting Matrix (economic modelling tool) SDPI Sustainable Development Policy Institute SIMPOC Statistical Information and Monitoring Programme on Child Labour SSA Sub-Saharan Africa UDHR Universal Declaration of Human Rights UK United Kingdom 2 UN United Nations UNDP United Nations Development Program UNPFII United Nations Permanent Forum on Indigenous Issues US United States USD US Dollar USDA Unites States Department of Agriculture WCA West and Central Africa WCR Western corn rootworm (Diabrotica virgifera ssp. virgifera) 3 Abstract This report addresses the question whether the cultivation of genetically modified (GM) crops abroad for import in the Netherlands, as compared to the cultivation of their conventional (non-GM) counterparts, is in line with Dutch policy and societal aims striving after more sustainable forms of agriculture worldwide and the utilization of the benefits offered by biotechnology in a responsible manner. Three crops were selected as case study objects: soybean, maize and cotton. The sustainability of GM and non-GM crop production was compared with each other based on a review of scientific and other literature. This comparison followed characteristics and criteria associated with the sustainability concept of ‘People, Planet, Profit’. For each crop, an overview of GM events widely used in cultivation and those in the pipeline is given. The GM events common in commercial cultivation and therefore discussed in detail in this review are herbicide tolerance (HT in soybean, maize and, to a lesser extent, cotton) and insect resistance (IR) conferred by Bt (in maize and cotton). First, ‘Planet’ impacts of these two types of traits are discussed under the subjects: production efficiency (including yields, fertilizers, biocides and energy), soil and water conservation, biodiversity and climate change. Then follows ‘Profit’ with the subjects: farm income, national income, economic welfare distribution, and financial and other risks (including institutional risks). Finally, ‘People’ is treated with the subjects: labour conditions (including wage levels, occupational health, employment opportunities, and child and forced labour), land rights, community rights and rights of indigenous people, freedom of choice, competition with food production, and contribution to livelihood of producers and local communities. In the final discussion, a more extensive summary of findings per crop is given, together with a discussion of some general issues with particular relevance to sustainability of GM crops. Our study clearly showed that no single value of sustainability can be given that is valid for all GM crops under all conditions. The term ‘GM crops’ encompasses a broad diversity of traits and crops with various goals and accompanying effects, and therefore, sustainability effects cannot be simply summarized for all traits and crops together. Apart from the technology by which they were made (which was not the subject of this review), GM traits in many respects do not represent changes largely or essentially different from other agricultural innovations. Overall, the performance of agriculture varies tremendously between regions and time periods irrespective of the presence of GM crops. Effects of a GM crop on one or more of the sustainability components thus depend on time and place as well, and effects found for a particular crop, region, and year cannot be simply extrapolated to generic conclusions.