Table 6. GM IR crops: average farm income benefit 1996–2012 ($/hectare).
Country | GM IR maize: cost of technology | GM IR maize (average farm income benefit (after deduction of cost of technology) | GM IR cotton: cost of technology | GM IR cotton (average farm income benefit (after deduction of cost of technology) |
---|---|---|---|---|
US | 17–32 IRCB, 22–42 IR CRW | 87 IRCB, 89 IR CRW | 26–58 | 107 |
Canada | 17–25 IRCB, 22–42 IR CRW | 89 IRCB 106 IR CRW | N/a | N/a |
Argentina | 20–33 | 19 | 26–86 | 191 |
Philippines | 30–47 | 94 | N/a | N/a |
South Africa | 8–17 | 80 | 14–50 | 192 |
Spain | 17–51 | 214 | N/a | N/a |
Uruguay | 20–33 | 26 | N/a | N/a |
Honduras | 100 | 61 | N/a | N/a |
Colombia | 43–49 | 247 | 50–175 | 67 |
Brazil | 54–69 | 83 | 34–52 | 8 |
China | N/a | N/a | 38–60 | 361 |
Australia | N/a | N/a | 85–299 | 211 |
Mexico | N/a | N/a | 48–70 | 182 |
India | N/a | N/a | 15–54 | 252 |
Burkina Faso | N/a | N/a | 51–54 | 201 |
Burma | N/a | N/a | 17–20 | 176 |
Pakistan | N/a | N/a | 4–15 | 77 |
Average across all user countries | 81 | 230 |
Notes: (1) GM IR maize all are IRCB unless stated (IRCB, insect resistance to corn boring pests); IRCRW, insect resistance to corn rootworm. (2) 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, the nature and effectiveness of the technology (e.g., second generation “Bollgard” cotton offered protection against a wider range of pests than the earlier first generation of “Bollgard” technology), exchange rates, average seed rates, and values identified in different studies. (3) Colombia, GM IR maize are farm level trials only. (4) Average across all countries is a weighted average based on areas planted in each user country. (5) n/a, not applicable.