O que o Brasil pode fazer para fortalecer a economia criativa? In: Home:. Curitiba: Ed. In: Home: em:. Economia Criativa - como ganhar dinheiro com ideias criativas. Books, OBEC, Ana Carla Fonseca Reis. Special Edition. Share your findings click here! The yield of conventional cotton is not stable, however, the net revenue of conventional cotton gradually increased from to , this is due to the high yield cotton price of conventional cotton that is indicate improved.
Moreover, the net revenue of Bt cotton and its counterpart in and was not significantly different, meanwhile the cotton yield of Bt and non Bt in and was highly different. It is also indicated that the conventional cotton more effective in terms of economic benefits at that time.
It is estimated to support about 60 million people, including farmers who cultivate the crop and those involved in the cotton industry for processing and trading Manjunath, India planted the largest area to biotech cotton at Most of Bt cotton growers in Indian, like in China, are small-scale farmers; several studies in the past of ten years Bt cotton commercialization have shown that they benefit considerably from adopting this technology in terms of reduction in pesticide use and higher effective yield Bennet et al.
Field trials in revealed a yield increase of percent for transgenic hybrids over their conventional hybrid counterpart Qaim, Surveys in and reflected that smallholder farmers growing Bt cotton in several regions had significantly higher yields 3, percent than those who grew conventional cotton Bennet et al. Before the introduction of Bt cotton in India, many farmers were often unable to adequately control bollworm despite the use of insecticide Qaim and Zilberman, Morse et al.
Economic impact of GM crops
While Bt plots had greater costs seed plus insecticide than non Bt plots, the yields and revenue from Bt plots were much higher than those non Bt plots some 39 and 63 percent higher in and , respectively. The gross margin of Bt plots were some 43 percent and 73 percent higher than those of non Bt plots Morse et al. Bt plots had higher yields and revenues compare to non Bt, while costs were typically higher for Bt they were not so much higher as to negate a substantial advantage in gross margin.
Given the yield advantage of Bt over non Bt is maintained and provided the price for the product is not much lower than non Bt, then it can be assumed that the gross margin benefits are likely to continue in the short to medium term. Generally, Bt technology can influence cotton profits mainly through three channels, namely, alters in yields, changes in pesticide cost, and converts in seed costs. Analyzed the impacts of Bt technology on cotton yields, profits and household living standard in India by using panel data during period which covers four states of India shown that Bt adoption has positive and significant net impacts.
This technology has increased per acre cotton yields and profits by 24 and 50 percent, respectively, and stated clearly underline that Bt cotton has significantly increased living standard of smallholder farm household in India Kathage and Qaim, Bt cotton technology has proved to be a success story in India, with farmers benefiting from pesticide reduction, higher effective yields, and significantly higher profits. In the first learning of adoption was a process for farmers, aggregate adoption has increased steadily and reached 65 percent of the country's cotton area in In the first year of adoption, most of the farmers refuse this technology because they were not fully satisfied.
Subramanian and Qaim a,b , have shown that the indirect advantages of Bt are somewhat lower for smallholders than for larger farms in India. Nonetheless, there is clear evidence that both small and larger cotton producers benefit considerably from the technology Qaim et al. The number of insecticide sprays and insecticide amounts used were significantly lower on Bt than on conventional plots. Apart of this, a major effect of Bt cotton in India is a significant yield advantage due to lower crop losses.
The Economic and Social Impact of GMOs in China
Over the years, average yields were percent higher for Bt than for conventional plots, which is due to more effective pest control and thus a reduction in crop damage. Again, differences over the years are largely due to variability in pest pressure. Higher yields and crop revenue are also the main reason for the significant gains in cotton profits. Paper by Pemsl et al. Qaim et al. These data are representative for cotton production in central and southern India. Subramanian and Qaim had surveyed the same farms in , and conducted a third round of data collection in As a result, Bt cotton produced 37 percent higher yield than conventional cotton, while insecticide amounts were 41 percent lower.
Between and , per acre net revenues were on average 2,, Indian Rupees Rs higher on Bt than on conventional cotton. Likewise, the results demonstrate that technology adoption entails important positive socio economic effects in the small farm sector. Bt cotton produces important merit in large parts of rural area in India.
The technology is net employment generating and deliver income gains for all types of households. Bt cotton in India has contributed to poverty reduction and rural development. Studies of Bt cotton benefits can be seen in Table IV which conducted by public institutes in India from the year to The data set of Qaim et al. These pre-commercialization studies confirmed that Bt cotton resulted in a major economic advantage to cotton farmers by substantially increasing yield, reducing insecticide use and reduction in labor cost Choudhary and Gaur, According to Choudhary and Gaur the first on farm study by Bennet et al.
Moreover, study by Ramgopal confirmed that the average Bt farmer had a 46 percent higher yield and applied 55 percent less pesticide use than non-Bt cotton farmer in Guntur District.
Dev and Rao reported a study which carried out in Warangal, Nalgonda, Guntur and also Kurnool in Andhra Pradesh representing the four agroclimatic zones in and , concluded that yield increase by 32 percent resulting in the overall cost of cotton per quintal decreasing by 11 percent.
Thus, as a result of higher yield and reduces pesticide sprays, Bt cotton farmers improved their net income by 83 percent over conventional cotton. It is notable that the economic benefit recorded in pre-commercializing field trials are consistent with the actual experience of farmers commercializing Bt cotton during the eight year period Since the first commercialized of Bt cotton in , transgenic Bt cultivars in USA appeared to have increased profits in most cases for the southern regions of Arkansas but have not been profitable for the northern regions of the state Bryant et al.
Since then, over a four year period, yields and costs were similar when comparing transgenic cultivars to non transgenic cultivars on farms in Mississippi Cooke et al. Early evaluations showed that Bt cotton provided more effective control of the three major caterpillars pests of cotton in the USA and yield increased across the Cotton Belt Edge et al.
Moreover, according to Sankula et al. Field trials conducted by Bryant et al.
In the other two site years, the highest yielding cultivar and those not significantly different from the highest yielding cultivars included glyphosate resistant, Bt, stacked gene and conventional cultivars. Furthermore, field studied were initiated in , and in Arkansas, reported by Bryant et al.
ponecapi.tk However, over the long run, as expressed by the three year averages, differences between some cultivars were relatively small. No single cultivar or type of production system stands out as always resulting in the greatest return. The evaluation of the profitability of various transgenic cotton varieties Roundup Ready RR and Liberty Link LL compared to conventional cotton has been conducted by Boman et al.
Cotton yield has been significantly influenced by the biotech revolution in the USA.
The biotech cotton traits, coupled by continued cotton cultivar improvement, accelerate the rate of yield increase over the past ten years by approximately 33 percent compared with the rate of cotton yield improvement before the introduction of transgenic cultivars. The potential economic advantages offered by the three cotton biotechnologies in the USA are expected to directly influence producer adoption considerations.
Pasu and Nicholas based on the empirical data in USA from to reported that the effectiveness of Bollgard cotton to control target pests against that of conventional practices is one of the most important factors in the farmers adoption decision. This maybe as much a reflection on the limited effectiveness of some conventional pest control practices, and also stated those producers who perceive effective preservation of beneficial insects, and concomitant benefits from secondary pest control, increase their level of Bollgard adoption. Meanwhile, use of reduced tillage practice and irrigation are also found to have positive effects on the adoption of RR cotton.
As in the case of bollgard, adoption of RR cotton is strongly influenced by its relative weed control effectiveness.
The perceived effectiveness of RR cotton in reducing production risks plays a significant role in the producer adoption decision. Moreover, perceived cost saving become a significant driver in the decision to adopt ST cotton varieties.
The combination of BG and RR traits may be resulting in a reduction in the numbers of sprays sufficient to make such cost efficiencies significant Pasu and Nicholas, Large two year farm scale evaluation of IR Insecticide Roundup cotton on 81 commercial fields in Arizona demonstrated a 40 percent reduction in number of insecticide applications for IR cotton relative to its counterparts Cattaneo et al.
Economic benefit is the one of the most prominent factor that can affect GM adoption technologies among the farmers worldwide including in USA where biotech cotton was first adopted, several surveys have demonstrated that growers are achieving higher yields from IR cotton and attaining higher profit.
New generation of IR cotton with stacked genes may provide additional economic returns. James , reported based on a study by Piggot and Marra of data in North Carolina, USA assessed the additional per hectare benefits to a farmer and to the state of North Carolina resulting from a change in policy for Bollgard II cotton that would eliminate the required refuge. Limited applied studies have addressed Bt and non Bt returns Bryant et al. These studies compared returns from Bt and Non Bt cotton varieties.
Besides, in order to increase yield, farmers in the US strive to achieve high fiber quality, both to maximize their price at the gin and to respond to world market needs that are in line with state-ofthe — art spinning mills requirements. One example is the introduction of FiberMax in the USA, Texas cotton farmers have increased their annual farm income substantially because of improved fiber quality and yield. In ten years, from , this varieties was able to achieve a The adoption of Bt cotton varieties carrying resistance genes for Helicoverpa punctigera Wallengren and H.
Knox et al. Australia planted over , hectares of biotech cotton in after a peak hectarage of almost , hectares in James, The introduction of GM cotton into Australia has had significant agronomic merits for farmers. Decreases in insecticide use and changes in the quantity have resulted in profit in terms of cost production lower input costs which has associated with economic benefits. According to Holtzapffel et al.
Business and Management
For example, in the average yield was ten bales of cotton per ha for both Bt and non Bt cotton varieties, meanwhile in conventional cotton averaged 7. Moreover, this technology would have significant benefits in terms of the use of chemical spray as well as decreasing the direct cost of spraying pesticide, the cost of applying them time, staff, machinery, etc. In Australia, the majority of cotton farmers have realized an economic gain from growing GM cotton, although performance obviously varies due to environmental or climatic differences across locations and seasons.