Agricultural Biotechnology

Agricultural Biotechnology

Marshall A. Martin

Professor and Associate Head

Department of Agricultural Economics

Purdue University

March 2000

What is biotechnology?

• New name for an old tool

• Molecular biology

• Genetic engineering

• Techniques of rDNA

Medical applications of biotechnology

• Control of diabetes with Humalin or Humalog

What are the new products of biotechnology?

• Food ingredients, e.g., chymosin

What are the new products of agricultural biotechnology?

• Animal growth hormones, e.g., bST

What are the new products of agricultural biotechnology?

• Herbicide tolerant crops, e.g., Roundup Ready soybeans and corn and Liberty Link corn

What are the new products of agricultural biotechnology?

• Insect resistant crops commercially available, e.g., Bt corn, cotton, and potatoes

• Corn rootworm resistance in 2001?

Biotechnology Adoption: 1999• Chymosin 80%

• Bst– Farmers 15%

– Herds 30%

• Crops – Corn 30%

– Cotton 50%

– soybeans 57%

Technology Adoption Rates

0

20

40

60

80

100

1 3 5 7 9 11 13 15 17 19

Years

- %

_

What are the new products of agricultural biotechnology?

• Identity-preserved or specific-attribute crops (vaccines, higher oil or starch content, additional amino acids)

Who are the stakeholders?

• Farmers

Who are the stakeholders?

• Agribusiness

Who are the stakeholders?

• Consumers

Who are the stakeholders?

• Environmentalists

Who are the stakeholders?

• International traders

Who are the stakeholders?

• Policy makers

Who are the stakeholders?

• Ethicists

Biotechnology Critics

What are their concerns?

Monarch Butterfly

• Cornell Universitylaboratory study of Btcorn pollen

Monarch Butterfly

• Cornell Universitylaboratory study of Btcorn pollen

• Recent field researchsuggests very fewadverseeffects fromBt corn

“Superweed”

• Cross pollination

“Superweed”

• Cross pollination

• Laboratory study ofcanola and mustardweed

“Superweed”

• Cross pollination

• Laboratory study ofcanola and mustardweed

• Not likely a majorproblem butis possible

Food Safety

• Allergenicity

Food Safety

• Allergenicity

• Unknown diseases orfuture health consequences

Food Safety

• Allergenicity

• Unknown diseases orfuture health consequences

• Safety of animal productsfrom livestock thatconsumeGMO-feed

Structure of Agriculture

• Corporate control ofthe food system

Structure of Agriculture

• Corporate control ofthe food system

• Ownership ofintellectual propertyrights

Structure of Agriculture

• Corporate control ofthe food system

• Ownership ofintellectual propertyrights

• Further decline in therole of the family farm

Xenotransplant

• Use of animals such asmilk-goats as bio-factories

Xenotransplant

• Use of animals such asmilk-goats as bio-factories

• Organ transplant suchas pig heart into ahuman

Who regulates agricultural biotechnology?

• U.S. Department of Agriculture’s Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service

Who regulates agricultural biotechnology?

• Environmental Protection Agency

Who regulates agricultural biotechnology?

• Food and Drug Administration

The International Trade Controversy over GMOs

• Who are our customers for agricultural commodities?

U.S. Corn Use 1999

• Exports 21%

• Feed 59%

• Food, Seed,& Industrial20%

U.S. Shelled Corn Exports 1999

• Canada 2%• Mexico 11%• South America 8%• EU-15 <1%• Asia 60%• (Japan) (30%)

U.S. Corn By-Products Exports 1999

• Canada 1%• Mexico 3%• South America 1%• EU-15 88%• Asia 6%• (Japan) (2%)

U.S. Soybean Use 1999

• Exports 31%

• Crush 61%

• Seed & Residual 8%

U.S. Soybean Exports1999

• Canada 1%• Mexico 15%• South America 1%• EU-15 26%• Asia 52%• (Japan) (16%)

U.S. Soybean Meal Exports1999

• Canada 13%• Mexico 2%• South America 15%• EU-15 7%• Asia 33%• (Japan) (4%)

Many Europeans uneasy about biotechnology

• Strong environmental movement

Many Europeans uneasy about biotechnology

• Strong environmental movement• No coherent regulatory system

Many Europeans uneasy about biotechnology

• Strong environmental movement• No coherent regulatory system• Weak public trust in government

since mad cow disease

Many Europeans uneasy about biotechnology

• Strong environmental movement• No coherent regulatory system• Weak public trust in government

since mad cow disease• EU consumers perceive no

benefits with potential risk

Many Europeans uneasy about agricultural biotechnology

• Strong environmental movement• No coherent regulatory system• Weak public trust in government

since mad cow disease• EU consumers perceive no

benefits with potential risk• Protectionist farm policies

Many Europeans uneasy about agricultural biotechnology

• Strong environmental movement• No coherent regulatory system• Weak public trust in government

since mad cow disease• EU consumers perceive no

benefits with potential risk• Protectionist farm policies• Strong support for

labeling

Geographic diversity in views

• Least support in Austria, Germany, Denmark, Sweden, and Luxembourg

Geographic diversity in views

• Least support in Austria, Germany, Denmark, Sweden, and Luxembourg

• More support in Portugal, Spain, Belgium, Finland, and Greece

U.S. Consumer Attitudes towards Food Biotechnology

• About 3/4 Americans have heard of biotechnology

U.S. Consumer Attitudes towards Food Biotechnology

• About 3/4 Americans have heard of biotechnology

• About 1 out of 3 consumers know that GMO foods are now in our supermarkets

U.S. Consumer Attitudes towards Food Biotechnology

• About 3/4 would buy a GMO food if less pesticide use

U.S. Consumer Attitudes towards Food Biotechnology

• About 3/4 would buy a GMO food if less pesticide use

• About 3/4 support FDA labeling of biotechnology foods with health and nutrition information

Montreal Agreement• “Precautionary principle”-

allows refusal of import without scientific basis

Montreal Agreement• “Precautionary principle”-

allows refusal of import without scientific basis

• Establishes Clearing House for GMO seeds

Montreal Agreement• “Precautionary principle”-

allows refusal of import without scientific basis

• Establishes Clearing House for GMO seeds

• Label “may contain” GMOs for food and feed

Montreal Agreement• “Precautionary principle”-allows

refusal of import without scientific basis

• Establishes Clearing House for GMO seeds

• Label “may contain” GMOs for food and feed

• Segregation still likely until 2002 when negotiators must meet again

What should I consider before adopting GMO crops?

• Technology fee

What should I consider before adopting GMO crops?

• Technology fee• Probability of a pest

problem

What should I consider before adopting GMO crops?

• Technology fee• Probability of a pest

problem• Per acre return of

GMO vs non-GMO

What should I consider before adopting GMO crops?

• Technology fee• Probability of a pest

problem• Per acre return of

GMO vs non-GMO • Is there a market?

What should I consider before adopting GMO crops?

• Technology fee• Probability of a pest

problem• Per acre return of

GMO vs non-GMO • Is there a market?• Will I need to

segregate the crop?

Should I adopt GMO crops in Indiana in 2000?

• Bt corn?– No in most Indiana

locations due to low probability of ECB infestation

• ID-219 “Economics of Bt Corn”

Should I adopt GMO crops in Indiana in 2000?

• Roundup soybeans?– Maybe, depending on weed

pressure, soil erosion concerns, input costs, and expected markets

Your Questions