- Introduction
Since the commercial introduction of GM crops in 1996, significant annual increases have been observed globally for hectarage cultivated, the number of countries growing GM crops and the number of farmers that have adopted GM crops (Figure 1). James (2009) reports that 134 million hectares of GM crops was put under cultivation by about 14 million farmers in 25 countries in 2009. The report estimates that the global value of the biotech crop market in 2009 was US$10.5 billion and this represented 20% of the US$52.2 billion global crop protection market. The share of biotech crop seeds in the estimated US$34 billion global commercial seed market was 30% in 2009. This valuation of the global biotech crop market was based on both the sale price of biotech seed and associated technology fees. The report further indicates that the accumulated global value for the twelve-year period (1996-2008) was an estimated US$62.3 billion. Brookes and Barfoot (2010, forthcoming cited in James 2009) also note that the global net economic benefit to GM crop farmers in 2008 was US$ 9.2 billion of which US$4.7 billion went to farmers in developing countries and US$4.5 billion to farmers in industrial countries. They note that since 1996, the accumulated farm benefits were $51.9 billion (US$26.1 billion was generated in developing countries and US$25.8 billion in industrial countries). An estimated 49.6% of the total cumulative farm income benefit of $51.9 billion was attributed to yield gains while the remaining 50.4% was due to reductions in the cost of production.Figure 1: Global area of GM crops (million hectares, 1996-2009)

Source: James, 2009
The observed annual increments and growth in global biotech crop adoption have been attributed to a number of factors including continued increases in the number of countries growing GM crops (adopter countries), additional crop acreage deployment in adopter countries, the introduction of new GM crops and traits, and the introduction of stacked or multi traits (James 2009; Brookes and Barfoot, 2009)
The eleven GM crops commercially deployed in 2009 were alfalfa, canola, cotton, maize, papaya, poplar, soybean, squash, sugarbeet, sweet pepper and tomato. Of these, maize was the most cropped in terms of number of adopter countries (Figure 2). In terms of hectarage cultivated, four crops accounted for almost all of the global GM crop area. These crops were soybean, maize, cotton and canola. GM soybean was the leading GM crop in 2009 occupying 69.2 million hectares with GM maize, cotton and canola following in decreasing order (Figure 3).
Source of data: James, 2009
Source of data: James, 2009
The three crop traits adopted were herbicide tolerance, insect resistance, and stacked traits. As was observed in previous years, herbicide tolerance was the leading GM crop trait. For the 83.6 million hectares of herbicide tolerance technology that was deployed in 2009, the crops most widely cultivated were alfalfa, canola, cotton, maize, soybean, and sugar beet. This hectarage represented 62% of the global biotech crop area. Available statistics suggest stacked double and triple traits appear to be increasingly more popular with farmers compared to insect resistance traits and this has been the case for the third successive year (2007, 2008 and 2009). Double stacks conferred pest resistance and herbicide tolerance while the triple stacks conferred resistance to two insect pests plus herbicide tolerance (James, 2009). In 2009, 11 countries planted GM crops with stacked traits. While 28.7 million hectares were planted to stacked traits, only 21.7 million hectares were planted to GM varieties with only insect resistance.
- Reasons for the fast adoption
For any agricultural technology, benefits are usually quantified in monetary terms. However, non-monetary benefit considerations including ease of operation, time savings, and lesser exposure to chemicals also inform farmer decisions (Fernandez-Cornejo and Caswell, 2006). Consequently, farmers’ adoption of new technologies is influenced by both monetary and non-monetary expectations of net benefits. Farmers normally choose technologies and practices that they expect to earn the greatest benefits based on yield performance, taste and preferences, farm characteristics, savings in management time, demand for produce/product, and costs. Similar considerations have driven the rapid increase in the adoption of GM crop varieties in countries that commercialized cultivation. Beyond farm profitability, other less quantifiable (non-pecuniary) benefits have been observed to have had important influences for technology adoption (Brookes and Barfoot, 2009). These benefits have received mention across adopter countries by farmers and were attributed to herbicide tolerant (HT) and insect resistant (IR) crops (Boxes 1 & 2).Box 1: Herbicide tolerant crops
Factors influencing farmer adoption of herbicide tolerant crops include:
- Ease of use associated with broad-spectrum, post-emergent herbicides and the increased/longer time window for spraying;
- Reduction in damage to crop arising from the application of post-emergent herbicide;
- Ability to use alternative production technologies such as no/reduced tillage practices ;
- Time and fuel savings from the adoption of no/reduced till compared to equivalent conventional crop husbandry practices;
- Ease of weed control leading to cleaner crops hence reduced harvesting costs, and time spent for harvesting. Resultant effect is improved harvest quality and premium price for quality;
- Avoidance of potential damage from soil-incorporated residual herbicides in follow-on crops;
- Improved quality of family life arising from social benefits derived from time savings made from crop husbandry practices.
Sources: Brooke & Barfoot, 2009; James, 2009; Karembou, 2009; Personal communication, 2008 & 2009
Box 2: Insect resistant crops
Factors influencing farmer adoption of insect resistant crops include:
- Reduced risks from crop loss associated with insect pests;
- Convenience associated with less time spent on crop walking and/or applying insecticides;
- Savings in fuel use mainly from reduced number of sprays and reduced tillage;
- Savings in the use of machinery (for spraying and possibly reduced harvesting times);
- Improved quality (e.g. lower levels of mycotoxins in GM IR maize);
- Improved health and safety for farmers and farm workers ensuing from reduced handling and use of pesticides;
- Easier crop husbandry practices;
- Facilitated second crop cultivation;
- Triggered subsidiary benefits for bee keepers as fewer bees were now lost to insecticide spraying;
- Improved family welfare and education for women and children.
Sources: Brooke & Barfoot, 2009; James, 2009; Karembou, 2009; Personal communication, 2008 & 2009
- Some Country Specific Statistics
Of the 25 countries that commercially cultivated GM crops, 9 were industrial countries while 16 were developing countries (Table 1). The US had the largest share of global biotech crop plantings in 2008 accounting for 64.0 million hectares. Other major growers were Brazil with 21.4 million ha, and Argentina with 21.3 million ha. Other notable mentions were India, Canada, China, Paraguay and South Africa.
Table 1: GM Crop Countries and Area Cultivated in 2009
Country Area
(million hectares)GM crops DEVELOPED COUNTRIES North America USA 64.0 Soybean, maize, cotton, canola, squash,papaya, alfalfa, sugar beet Canada 8.2 Canola, maize, soybean, sugar beet Europe & Oceania Australia 0.2 Cotton, canola Spain 0.1 Maize Czech republic < 0.1 Maize Portugal < 0.1 Maize Romania < 0.1 Maize Poland < 0.1 Maize Slovakia < 0.1 Maize DEVELOPING COUNTRIES South America & Central America Brazil 21.4 Soybean, maize, cotton Argentina 21.3 Soybean, maize, cotton Paraguay 2.2 Soybean Uruguay 0.8 Soybean, maize Bolivia 0.8 Soybean Mexico 0.1 Cotton, soybean Chile < 0.1 Maize, soybean, canola Colombia < 0.1 Cotton Honduras < 0.1 Maize Costa Rica < 0.1 Cotton, soybean Asia India 8.4 Cotton China 3.7 Cotton, tomato, poplar, papaya, sweetpepper Philippines 0.5 Maize Africa South Africa 2.1 Maize, soybean, cotton Burkina Faso 0.1 Cotton Egypt < 0.1 Maize Source of data: James 2009; Brookes and Barfoot, 2009
Currently, farmers in the US grow more GM soybean, maize, cotton and canola than conventional varieties (Figure 4). The scenario is not different in Canada for GM soybean, maize, and canola. The benefits accruing to adopter farmers in these countries are well documented (see James 2009; Brookes and Barfoot, 2009).
Source of data: James 2009; Brookes and Barfoot, 2009
Brookes and Barfoot (2009) report that both small- and large-scale farmers have adopted GM crops and that the size of operation appears not to influence adoption. Available statistics indicates that over 90% (13 million of the global total of 14 million) of adopter farmers in 2009 were small and resource-poor farmers from developing countries. This farmer population was made up of 7.0 million Bt cotton farmers in China; 5.6 million Bt cotton farmers in India; with the remaining 250,000 being biotech maize farmers in the Philippines, biotech cotton, maize and soybeans farmers in South Africa, and twelve other developing countries.
The three countries commercially growing GM crops in Asia are India, China and the Philippines. In India where Bt cotton remains the only commercialized GM crop, 8.4 million hectares was planted to the crop in 2009 representing 87% of the total cotton area in the country. As mentioned earlier, an estimated 5 million small-scale farmers benefited from planting the crop. It was observed that yield increased by 31% through the use of GM crops, while insecticide use decreased by 39% resulting in a combined effect of increased profitability by 88%, the equivalent to US$250 per hectare in 2008. For the 7.0 million small- and resource-poor farmers who benefited from cultivating Bt cotton in China, studies conducted by the Center for Chinese Agricultural Policy (CCAP) indicated that, on the average, small-scale farmers increased their yield by 9.6%, reduced insecticide use by 60% (which had positive implications for both the environment and the farmers’ health), and generated a substantial US$220/ha increase in farm income (James, 2009). Small-scale farmers who grew Bt maize in the Philippines were also reported to have gained from the crop in 2008. A socio-economic impact study reported that these farmers gained an additional farm income from Bt maize of about US$135 per hectare during the dry season and about US$125 per hectare during the wet season of the 2003-2004 crop year (James, 2009).
Stacked GM crops were cultivated in 3 industrial countries (USA, Canada, and Australia) and 7 developing countries (Argentina, South Africa, Philippines, Mexico, Honduras, Chile, Colombia, and Costa Rica). Overall, a total of 28.7 million hectares of stacked GM crops were planted in 2009, an increase over the 26.9 million hectares planted in 2008. These were double and triple stacked traits.
GM insect resistant cotton and GM herbicide tolerant soybean were the leading crop traits in terms of hectarage cultivated in the developing countries while GM insect resistant maize and GM herbicide tolerant soybean were more prominent for the developed countries.
Source of data: Brookes and Barfoot, 2009
In 2008, Burkina Faso and Egypt joined South Africa in the commercial cultivation of GM crops in Africa. Following are briefs on the country situations.- South Africa
South Africa is the first African country to commercialize GM crops. The three crops commercially cultivated in South Africa are Bt maize, Roundup Ready soybean and Bt cotton. Of these, Bt cotton was the first GM crop to be commercially cultivated. Of the estimated total 13,000 hectares of conventional and GM cotton planted in 2008, 92 percent was GM cotton. Eighty-three 83 percent of the GM variety had the Bt/herbicide tolerant stacked traits, 9 percent herbicide-tolerant trait only and 8 percent the Bt trait only. A new variety with hairy leaves has been introduced along with the Bt trait to protect against non-target sucking insect pests that are not controlled by the Bt toxin alone (Karembu et al., 2009).
Studies have reported farm-level benefits that have translated into increased adoption rates. Yield gains exceeding 40 percent have been reported to in comparison with conventional cotton in addition to reduced spraying costs by 42 percent, reduced number of pesticide sprayings from 10 to 4 sprays per season, reduced production costs resulting in higher gross margins ranging from US$ 70–130 /2 ha of cotton (Ismael et al 2002; Morse et al., 2005; AfricaBio, 2007).
From an initial 197,000 hectares in 2001, the area planted to GM crops increased to 1.6 million hectares in 2007 and 1.8 million hectares in 2008. Of the three GM crops grown, Bt maize is the leading crop in terms of hectarage under cultivation with a share of 89 percent of all GM crops. In addition, Bt maize occupies 62 percent of all land cultivated to Maize, be it conventional or GM. The net benefits from biotech maize was estimated at US$227 million in 2007 while the accumulated benefits from 1998 to 2007 was US$383 million (Brookes and Barfoot, 2009).
A study by Gouse et al. (2005) on Bt maize involving 368 small-scale and resource-poor farmers compared to 33 commercial farmers was quite revealing. The commercial farmers were grouped into two, those cultivating under irrigation and those under rain-fed production systems. Higher yields were observed for farmers who cultivated under irrigation systems. This group obtained 12.1 MT /ha, an 11 percent increase over the previous year’s yield. These farmers also obtained cost savings in insecticide use of US$18/ha representing a 60 percent reduction and an increased income of US$117/ha. Farmers who grew Bt maize under rain-fed conditions obtained 3.4 MT/ha, also an 11 percent yield gain over the previous year’s yield. Cost savings on insecticide use for this group was US$7/ha representing a 60 percent reduction and the combined effect was an increase in income of US$35/ha.
The smallholder Bt maize farmers group was compared to others who grew conventional hybrid and open pollinated maize varieties in terms of yield per hectare (Gouse et al., 2005). Bt maize recorded yield gains of 31 percent and 134 percent over conventional hybrids and open-pollinated varieties respectively. Another study that used longitudinal study over 9-year period (2000 to 2008) reported that small-scale Bt maize farmers in South Africa gained an additional US$ 267 million (Goose and Van der Walt, 2008).
In 2008, of the 230,000 hectares planted to soybean in South Africa, 184,000 hectares, representing 80 percent was herbicide tolerant soybean. This was achieved after eight years of commercialization. The impressive adopter rate has been attributed to cost savings from reduced insecticide use and facile crop management.
- Burkina Faso
Cotton is the principal cash crop in Burkina Faso generating over US$ 300 million in annual revenues representing about 60 percent of the country’s export earnings (ICAC, 2006). Despite this contribution, the agricultural sector in the country is beset by a number of challenges including low yields, drought, poor soil, insect pests and lack of infrastructure and inadequate credit. Though approximately 475,000 hectares of conventional cotton was planted in 2008, the crop continues to record low average yields of 367 kg per hectare. Studies have also reported crop losses in excess of 30 percent due to insect-pests of cotton (Goze et al., 2003; Vaissayre and Cauquil, 2000).
At the national level, the annual cost for insecticides for the control of cotton bollworms and related insect-pests is around US$ 60 million per year (Toe, 2003 cited in Karembou, 2009). However, insecticides are proving ineffective, with losses due to bollworm as high as 40 percent even with full application of insecticides (Traoré et al., 2006). As a result of these challenges, Burkina Faso’s cotton production decreased to 0.68 million bales in 2007/08 from 1.3 million bales in 2006/07.
After 5 years of conducting confined fields trials, approval was granted for the commercial cultivation of Bt cotton. Vitale et al., (2008) estimate that cultivation of Bt cotton would result in yield increases of 20 percent and a decreased need for insecticides that would generate US$ 106 million per year for Burkina Faso. In 2008, Burkina Faso for the first time planted approximately 8,500 hectares of Bt cotton for seed production and initial commercialization, becoming the 10th country globally to grow commercial Bt cotton. This was after some 4,500 farmers successfully produced 1,600 tonnes of Bt cotton seed on a total of 6,800 farmer fields. In 2009, area under Bt cotton significantly rose to approximately 115,000 hectares representing 29% of total cotton area in Burkina Faso.
- Egypt
Only 3 percent of the land area (about 2.5 million hectares) in Egypt is devoted to agriculture. Maize is an important crop in Egypt and is planted on approximately 728,000 hectares. Egypt imports about half of its food to augment domestic production. Egypt annually produces about 6.1 million tons of maize while importing 4.5 million tons of yellow maize annually to meet domestic demands. About 90 percent of land put under maize is white maize with the rest planted to yellow maize. In 2008, the Bt yellow maize hybrid was commercially approved after five years of confined field trials. Results from the field trials indicate up to 30 percent yield increment over conventional yellow hybrid maize (Karembu, 2009).
In 2008, Egypt commercialized hybrid Bt yellow maize by planting 700 hectares. Egypt thus became the first country in North Africa and the Arab world to commercialize GM crops. In 2009, Egypt planted approximately 1,000 hectares of Bt maize, a modest increase and the result of the inability to secure import licenses for seed. Hence, only 28 tons of locally produced seed were available to plant the 1,000 hectares.
- South Africa
Brooks G and P. Barfoot (2009). GM Crops: Global Socio-Economic and Environmental Impacts, 1996-2007. PG Economics Ltd, Dorchester, UK. 128 pp
James, Clive (2009). Global Status of Commercialized Biotech/GM Crops: 2009. ISAAA Brief No. 41. ISAAA: Ithaca, NY.
Karembu, M, F. Nguthi and H. Ismail (2009). Biotech Crops in Africa: The Final Frontier. ISAAA AfriCenter, Nairobi, Kenya. 34 pp.






English
Français