TABLE 3.

GM HT cotton summary of average farm level economic impacts 1996–2014 ($/hectare)

Country	Cost of technology	Average farm income benefit (after deduction of cost of technology)	Aggregate income benefit (million $)	Type of benefit	References
US	13–82	21	1,074.1	Cost savings	Carpenter and Gianessi (2002) Sankala and Blumenthal (2003, 2005) Johnson and Strom (2008) Also updated to reflect herbicide price and common product usage
South Africa	15–32	35	4.2	Cost savings	Personal communication from Monsanto South Africa and updated since 2008 to reflect changes in herbicide prices and usage
Australia	32–82	28	91.5	Cost savings	Doyle et al (2003) Monsanto Australia (personal communications) and updated to reflect changes in herbicide usage and prices
Argentina	12–30	40	145.0	Cost savings and yield gain of +9%	Personal communication from Monsanto Argentina, Grupo CEO and updated since 2008 to reflect changes in herbicide prices and usage
Brazil	33–52	76	133.2	Cost savings plus yield gains of +1.6% to +4%	Galveo (2010, 2012, 2013, 2014)
Mexico	29–79	227	183.2	Cost savings plus yield gains of +3% to +18%	Monsanto Mexico annual monitoring reports submitted to the Ministry of Agriculture and personal communications
Colombia	96–187	97	23.0	Cost savings plus yield gains of +4%	Monsanto Colombia annual personal communications

1. The range in values for cost of technology relates to annual changes in the average cost paid by farmers. It varies for reasons such as the price of the technology set by seed companies, exchange rates, average seed rates, the nature and effectiveness of the technology (eg, second generation ‘Flex’ cotton offered more flexible and cost effective weed control than the earlier first generation of HT technology) and values identified in different studies.

2. For additional details of how impacts have been estimated, see examples in Appendix 1.