10 May 2017. Ghent. The 2017 IIBN Forum Presentation of Matin Qaim – University of Göttingen, Germany

1. Can GM crops contribute to food
security and sustainable agricultural
development?
Evidence from 20 years of impact research
Matin Qaim
Agricultural Economist
3rd Forum of the International Industrial Biotechnology Network (IIBN)
Ghent, 10 May 2017

2. Georg-August-Universität
Göttingen
Why more agricultural technology?
2
1. Environmental problems of
agricultural production
2. Existing food insecurity
3. Growing global demand and
resource scarcity
4. Many of the poor in Africa and Asia
depend on small-scale farming as
the key source of income

3. Georg-August-Universität
Göttingen
Common approaches in plant breeding
§ Mass selection
§ Backcrossing
§ Wide crosses
§ Hybridization
§ Mutagenesis
§ Marker-assisted selection
§ Protoplast fusion
§ Agrobacterium-mediated gene transfer
§ Biolistics
§ Genome editing (CRISPR/Cas etc.)
PAS Study Week 2009 3
“Conventional breeding”
“Genetic engineering
(GMOs)”
(“natural” and “safe”)
(“unnatural” and “risky”)

4. Georg-August-Universität
Göttingen
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
160
180
200
1996 1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 2008 2010 2012 2014 2016
Millionha
Total
Industrialized countries
Developing
countries
Global area cultivated with GMOs
Source: James (2017).
4
Only two modified traits:
1. Herbicide tolerance
2. Insect resistance

5. Georg-August-Universität
Göttingen
Impact studies
§ Many impact studies carried out over the last 20 years:
ü Focusing on different countries
ü With different types of data
ü With different methodologies
ü With different results
PAS Study Week 2009 5
§ GMO supporters and opponents refer to their “preferred
studies” in the debate, leading to further polarization
§ Meta-analysis can be useful to:
ü Draw broader lessons from the cumulated evidence
ü Explain reasons for heterogeneity in impacts

6. Georg-August-Universität
Göttingen
Global meta-analysis of GM crop impacts
PAS Study Week 2009 6
Klümper and Qaim (2014, PLoS ONE)
21.6***
-36.9***
3.3
68.2***
-60
-40
-20
0
20
40
60
80
Crop yield
(n=451)
Pesticide quantity
(n=121)
Production cost
(n=115)
Farmer profit
(n=136)
Percent
*, **, *** means significant at the
10%, 5%, and 1% level, respectively.

7. Georg-August-Universität
Göttingen
Distribution of GM yield effects
PAS Study Week 2009 7
0.005.01.015.02
Density
-50 0 50 100
change in yield (%)
Source: Klümper and Qaim (2014, PloS ONE).

8. Georg-August-Universität
Göttingen
Meta-analysis
PAS Study Week 2009 8
(1) All GM
crops
(2) Insect
resistance
(3) Herbicide
tolerance (HT)
Yield 21.6*** 24.9*** 9.3**
Pesticide quantity -36.9*** -41.7*** 2.4
Source: Klümper and Qaim (2014, PLoS ONE).
Breakdown by type of technology
• HT has helped to reduce soil tillage and GHG emissions
• In some regions, weed resistance to glyphosate has
reduced the benefits of HT crops over time

9. Georg-August-Universität
Göttingen
Breakdown by geographical regions
PAS Study Week 2009 9
Yield Pesticide Farmer profit
Developing country
(dummy)
14.17*** -19.16*** 59.52***
N 451 193 136
Meta-regression results (percentage point effects)
Source: Klümper and Qaim (2014, PLoS ONE).
Developing-country farmers benefit more because:
1. They suffer more from pest and disease problems
2. Most GM technologies are not patented there, so that seed
prices are cheaper than in developed countries

10. Georg-August-Universität
Göttingen
What do we know about GM
crop impacts in a small farm
context?
10

11. Georg-August-Universität
Göttingen
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
2002 2004 2006 2008 2010 2012 2014
Millionha
11
Bt cotton adoption in India
In 2015: 11.6 m ha (97%)
Grown by 8 million
smallholders

12. Georg-August-Universität
Göttingen IAAE 2009 12
Impact analysis with panel data
Survey of 530 farm
households in four
major cotton-
producing states
Panel survey in
four rounds
between 2002 and
2009
Statistical
differencing
techniques to
control for biases

13. Georg-August-Universität
Göttingen
Bt impact on insecticide use
PAS Study Week 2009 13
Source: Krishna and Qaim (2012, Agric. Systems).
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
Conventional
2002-2004
Bt 2002-2004 Bt 2006-2008 Conventional
2006-2008
Activeingredient(kg/ha)
-50%
-37%

14. Georg-August-Universität
Göttingen
Bt impact on yield and farmer profit in India
14
Yield
(kg/ha)
Profit
($/ha)
Bt effect
311***
(+24%)
94***
(+50%)
Change over time 0 / + 0 / +
Sources: Kathage and Qaim (2012, PNAS), Qaim and Kouser (2013, PLoS ONE).
Household
consumption
value (US$)
Calorie
consumption
(kcal/person)
Calories from
high-value food
(kcal/person)
Bt effect
321**
(+18%)
145***
(+5%)
47***
(+7%)
Bt impact on household living standard

15. Georg-August-Universität
Göttingen 15
Household income effects per ha of cotton
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
-Extremely poor Moderately poor Non poorAll households
Bt
Conventional
US$/ha
$246/ha
x 11.6 m = $2.9 billion Source: Subramanian and
Qaim (2010, J. Dev. Stud.).

16. Georg-August-Universität
Göttingen PAS Study Week 2009 16
Sources: Kathage and Qaim (2012), Qaim and Kouser (2013).
Total Tox I Tox II
Tox III &
IV
Bt effect (2002-2004) -2.74*** -1.38* -1.21* -0.15
Bt effect (2006-2008) -4.42*** -2.67*** -1.63*** -0.15*
Environmental and health effects of Bt
Effects on pesticide use by toxicity class (per ha)
Source: Kouser and Qaim (2011, Ecol. Econ.),
Cases per ha
Cases in total India
(million)
Bt effect -0.26*** -2.98***
Effects on cases of acute pesticide poisoning

17. Georg-August-Universität
Göttingen
Effects on varietal diversity
PAS Study Week 2009 17
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
Farm level Village level District level State level
Number
2002 2004 2006 2008
Mean number of cotton varieties grown by sample farms
Source: Krishna, Qaim, Zilberman (2016, Eur. Rev. Agr. Econ.).

18. Georg-August-Universität
Göttingen
Future prospects
§ Evidence suggests that GM crops can be beneficial for
farmers, consumers, and the environment.
§ So far, very limited range of GM technologies. Future
technologies could be much more beneficial.
§ Many more interesting GM technologies tested in the field:
§ Drought-tolerant and salt-tolerant maize, rice, and wheat
§ Maize and rice with higher nitrogen use efficiency
§ Micronutrient-rich rice, sorghum, cassava, and banana
§ Pest- and disease-resistant rice, cassava, pulses, vegetables
§ Etc.
§ Will these technologies ever be commercialized?
PAS Study Week 2009 18

19. Georg-August-Universität
Göttingen
Threat of overregulation
Many countries in Africa and Asia have established EU-style
regulatory systems (and attitudes) that are stricter and more
complex than for any other agricultural technology.
PAS Study Week 2009 19
Effects of overregulation
§ Fuels public notion that GM crops are dangerous
§ Makes technology unnecessarily expensive
§ Contributes to industry concentration (multinationals)
§ Contributes to focus on large countries, large crops, and
traits of large commercial interest
§ Poor countries and people suffer most from overregulation
§ EU anti-biotech attitudes have far-reaching global
implications

20. Georg-August-Universität
Göttingen
Conclusion
§ GMOs are not a panacea, but there is
strong evidence that they can
contribute to food security and pro-
poor growth
§ Without modern plant science in all its
forms, sustainable development will
hardly be possible
§ Like for any technology, there are
certain issues that need to be
addressed, but the strong public and
policy reservations have no scientific
basis
PAS Study Week 2009 20
Further reading:
Palgrave Macmillan, 2016