Jeffrey Vitale Gaspard Vognan Marc Ouattarra Karim Traore Oumar Guigemo Burkina Faso Bollgard II ® Socio-economic Study: Outcomes from 2011 Field Surveys
Dec 30, 2015
Jeffrey VitaleGaspard VognanMarc Ouattarra Karim Traore
Oumar Guigemo
Burkina FasoBollgard II ®
Socio-economic Study: Outcomes from 2011 Field Surveys
Burkina Faso: Pioneering Bt Cotton in SSA Africa
Source: ISAAA 2011.
Burkina Faso: Pioneering Bt Cotton in Africa
• What makes the Burkina Faso story unique?– Demonstrates the feasibility of introducing a GM crop
in a less developed country– Persistence and determination in an environment
often hostile to biotechnology and GM crops– Collaboration among diverse stakeholders, including
smallholder producers, private sector, and public sector
19601963
19661969
19721975
19781981
19841987
19901993
19961999
20022005
20080
200
400
600
800
1,000
1,200
1,400
1,600
Yield
Year
Are
a (
ha
)
Success -> StagnationPests, soil degradation, seed quality, land expansionFertilizer, pesticides, new varieties,
animal traction, extension services Initial contact between Burkina Faso & Monsanto
The Burkina Faso Story: Origins
• Discontent and frustration with “conventional” pest control management
Conventional Pest Mgmt
• Conventional pest management is a spray-based regiment with 6 applications
• 4 sprays target bollworms (caterpillars) early in the season: endosulfans
• 2 sprays target piercing/sucking (aphids, whiteflies, etc.) later in the season: pyrethroidsThis management approach is termed “conventional cotton”.
The Burkina Faso Story: Origins
• Discontent and frustration with conventional pest methods: – Pest resistance to pyrethroids- return to endosulfans– Health risks and problems – More intensive use of pesticides → rising costs– Ineffective applications (wash-off, timing)– Crop damage and yield losses – Build-up of pest density from long-term cotton production
Health and Environmental Concerns
• Environmental and health concerns, particularly the use of endosulfans.– Reports of illness and even death– Children often at risk
Pest Damage• Cotton yield losses due to insect pest damage on conventional
cotton range between 15% to 35% throughout West Africa, creating economic losses between $18 and $40 million in Burkina Faso
Cotton Boll damage
Bollgard II in Burkina Faso • < 2003 Success -> Stagnation
• 2003-05 Confined Field Trials
• 2006 Demonstration Plots
• 2007 On-farm trials
• 2008 Limited Commercial release
• 2009-11 Large-Scale Commercial release
Initial contacts + all of the political capital required to legalize the testing of Bt cotton.
Biosafety protocols
Business model
Legal frameworks
Technical capacity
Testing & Evaluation: 2003-2007
Bollgard II in Burkina Faso • < 2003 Success -> Stagnation
• 2003-05 Confined Field Trials
• 2006 Demonstration Plots
• 2007 On-farm Trials
• 2008 Limited Commercial Release
• 2009-11 Large-Scale Commercial Release
Burkina Faso: Commercial Use of Bt Cotton
2009 2010 2011 Average0
50,000100,000150,000200,000250,000300,000350,000400,000450,000500,000
31%
66% 59%52%
BtTotal
Year
Are
a (h
a)
Purpose
• Report findings from 2011 field surveys of 548 cotton producers conducted in Burkina Faso
• Measure the economic impacts of Bollgard II on:– Production cost– Yield– Profit– Size and distribution of benefits among stakeholders
• Assess impacts of pesticide use on human health – Poisoning incidents– Pesticide handling practices
Analysis & Outcomes from 2011 Field Survey
July through December, 2011
Data Analysis• Developed ANOVA models of cotton yield
using the following equation, its main effects, levels, and interaction terms:
Bt Conventional
0 1 2Manual< 1 ha
Small1 bullock pair
Large 2 or more bullock pairs
Yield = f(Gene, Farm_Type , Zone, Late Season Sprays)
SOFITEXFaso Cotton
Socoma
Cotton Zones
PoSOFITEX ≈ 80% production
SOCOMA ≈ 5% update these numbers using Doulayes numbers production
FASO COTTON ≈ 15% production
N = 80 households
N = 40 households
Fada
ANOVA Results
Bt Gene Effect0
200
400
600
800
1,000
1,200
981
1,175
Conventional BG II
Yiel
d (k
g pe
r ha)
a
ANOVA Yield Model Results• Bt Gene effect
BG II Generated Significantly Higher Yields than Conventional Cotton in 2011
Bt gene effect is positive and significant
19.7% Yield Advantage of BG II over Conventional cotton b
Are the Bt Yield Gains Equitable?
• Can we further explain the yields?
• Always concerns over the equity so we always investigate potential “bias”.
• Does the impact vary across farm type? Zone? Late season (secondary) sprays?
Manual Medium Large Average0
200
400
600
800
1,000
1,200
1,400
915 9471,033
981
1,2151,109
1,2471,175
Conventional BG II
ANOVA Yield Model Results• Farm Type effect
Large Farms Generated Significantly Higher Yields than medium Farms, but no significant difference in BG II yield advantage.
Is the average yield increase consistent across farm type?
33% 17% 21% 19.7%
% diff
aab bc c b
SOFITEX SOCOMA Faso Cotton Average0
200
400
600
800
1,000
1,200
1,400
1053972
834
981
1258 1,235
995
1175
Conventional BG II
Yiel
d (k
g pe
r ha)
ANOVA Yield Model Results• Zone effect
BG II Generated statistically higher yields in the SOFITEX and SOCOMA regions compared to Faso Cottonbut no significant difference in yield advantage.
% diff
ba
ab b c
20% 27% 19% 19.7%
ANOVA Yield Model Results• Spray effect from 2009
Bt cotton producers who followed recommended spray generated significantly higher yields than those who sprayed only once or did not spray at all.
0 1 2 Mean0
200
400
600
800
1,000
1,200
1,400
802
1,054
1,266
1,109
933 933
Conventional BG II
Yie
ld (
kg
pe
r h
a)
N=21
N=34
N=44 N=15
ab bcc
ANOVA Yield Model Results• Late-season spray effect from 2011
No significant effect of late-season sprays in 2011 unlike 2009, but the second spray is still rational as we will see later.
0 1 2 Average0
200
400
600
800
1,000
1,200
1,400
966902
1,049 9811,089
1,165 1,175
Conventional BG II
Late Season Sprays
Yiel
d (k
g pe
r ha)
N=30N=0 N=165
aabb b
21% 11% 19.7%
b
Insecticide Seed Labor Other Total 0
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
400
4514
141 147
348
12
60
144 142
358
Conventional BG II
Cost
($
per h
a)
ANOVA Model of Production Costs• Costs equal across zone and farm type effects
No significant difference in production costs
Increase in Seed Cost Largely Offset by Savings in Insecticide Costs $46 ≈ $33Producer’s capture nearly all of the yield benefits (about 86.8%) No significant increase in risk
aa
ANOVA Model of Profit• BG II generated significantly higher profit on
average across zone and farm type
Δ Profit =$95 per haΔ
Revenue Prod Cost Profit0
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
534
348
187
640
358
282
Conventional BG II
Rev,
Cos
t, &
Pro
fit ($
per
ha)
51.1% increaseab
≈
ANOVA Model of Profit: Farm Type
• Profit equal across farm Type
Manual Medium Large Average0
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
148.56172.11
220.49
186.54
304.24
241.84
331.37
281.89
Conventional BG II
Profi
t ($
per h
a)
105% 41% 50% 51.1%
aabb
c cb
ANOVA Profit Model: Across Zone• BGII generated significantly higher income in
each zone
SOFITEX SOCOMA Faso Cotton ALL Zones0
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
215.4196.2
120.9
186.5
329.0311.5
175.7
281.9
Conventional BG II
Profi
t ($
per h
a)
ba
ab b c
52% 55% 45% 51.1%
ANOVA Model of Profit• Profit equal across sprays
0 1 2 Average0
50
100
150
200
250
300
177.04
147.5
211.72186.54
250
278 282
Conventional BG II
Late Season Sprays
Yiel
d (k
g pe
r ha)
N=30N=0 N=165
aabb bb
Distribution of Benefits
67.4%32.6%
2011
ProducersSeed Industry & Ginning Industry
53.1%
46.9%
2009
ProducersSeed Industry & Ginning Industry
66%34%
2010
ProducersSeed Industry & Ginning Industry
Aggregation of Benefits
200 0 200 400 Miles
Bfa_aug01-jan05.shp00.1 - 0.50.5 - 11 - 55 - 88 - 1010 - 12.5
N
EW
S
$66 million
Socio-Economic Benefits BG II: Summary 2009-2011
2009 2010 2011 Average0
200
400
600
800
1,000
1,200
1,400
931849
981 971
1,140 1,0971,175 1,168
ConvBG II
Year
Yiel
d (k
g/ha
)
22% 29% 20% 20.3%
Socio-Economic Benefits BG II: Summary 2009-2011
2009 2010 2011 Average
-50.00
0.00
50.00
100.00
150.00
200.00
250.00
300.00
-31.79
47.62
186.54
67.46
33.79
131.71
281.89
149.13
ConvBG II
Year
Profi
t ($/
ha)
206% 177%
52% 121%
Socio-Economic Benefits BG II: Summary 2009-2011
• Significant benefits from growing BGII
• Consistent benefits across all three years
• Equitable benefits across farm type and zone
► Health Welfare Summary of Findings
► 46% of households self-reported at least one poisoning incident over last 5 years► 83% related to insecticides
► BGII would reduce cases by ca 5 500 incidents adding up to $1.29 Million
► BGII would reduce number of pesticide containers by $1.4 million
► 49% of farmers raise health risk as the major reason to adopt BGII
The End