Country	Area of trait (‘000 ha)	Yield assumption % change	Base yield (tonnes/ha)	Farm level price ($/tonne)	Cost of technology ($/ha)	Impact on costs, net of cost of technology ($/ha)	Change in farm income ($/ha)	Change in farm income at national level (‘000 $)	Production impact (‘000 tonnes)
US	29,944	Nil	10.73	162	−28.32	+36.17	+36.17	+1,083,083	Nil
Canada	1,184	Nil	9.36	167	−31.28	+23.53	+23.53	+27,860	Nil
Argentina: as single trait	401	+3% con belt, +22% marginal areas	6.08 corn belt, 3.75 marginal areas	119	−8.9	+6.71	+21.74 corn belt, +98.34 marginal areas	+29,823	+227
Argentina: as stacked trait	3,401	+10.25	5.41	119	−18.9	−3.32	+62.8	+213,577	+1,886
South Africa	1,990	Nil	3.7	229	−11.06	+12.36	+12.36	+24,602	Nil
Philippines	688	+5	2.86	288	−45.05	−14.21	+26.92	+18,530	+98
Colombia	55	Zero	3.65	334	−21.65	+15.34	+15.34	+841	Nil
Brazil	7,980	+3	4.99	191	−15.67	−3.48	+25.15	+200,785	+1,298
Uruguay	67	Nil	5.76	173	−8.92	+6.71	+6.71	+467	Nil
Paraguay	500	Nil	4.53	119	−16.47	+1.02	+1.02	+511	Nil

Notes:

1. Where no positive yield effect due to this technology is applied, the base yields shown are the indicative average yields for the crops and differ (are higher) than those used for the GM IR base yield analysis, which have been adjusted downwards to reflect the impact of the yield enhancing technology (see below).

2. Argentina: single trait. In the Corn Belt it is assumed that 70% of trait plantings occur in this region and marginal regions account for the balance. In relation to stacked traits, the yield impact (+10.25%) is in addition to the yield 5.5% impact presented for the GM IR trait (above). In other words the total estimated yield impact of stacked traits is +15.75%. The cost of the technology also relates specifically to the HT part of the technology (sold within the stack).