GM Crops: The First Ten Years - International Service for the ...

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Table 47. Comparison of insecticide ai use and field EIQ values for conventional, Ingard and Bollgard II cotton in Australia Year Active ingredient use (kg/ha) Conventional 11 Ingard Bollgard II Field EIQ value/ha 220 97 39 Sources and notes: derived from Industry sources and CSIRO 2005. Ingard cotton grown from 1996, Bollgard from 2003/04 Table 48. National level changes in insecticide ai use and field EIQ values for GM IR cotton in Australia 1996-2005 Year ai decrease (kg) eiq savings (units) 1996 266,945 4,900,628 1997 390,175 7,162,905 1998 667,052 12,245,880 1999 896,795 16,463,550 2000 1,105,500 20,295,000 2001 909,538 16,697,496 2002 481,911 8,847,021 2003 427,621 7,850,352 2004 1,932,876 39,755,745 2005 2,177,393 44,785,011 GM Crops: The First Ten Years 4.3 % decrease in ai 6.1 9.1 12.2 15.2 19.6 23.8 19.1 20.1 56.1 64.7 2.2 % saving eiq 5.6 8.4 11.2 14.0 18.0 21.9 17.6 18.4 57.7 66.6 d) Argentina Adoption of GM IR cotton in Argentina has also resulted in important reductions in insecticide use 79 : • The average volume of insecticide ai used by GM IR users is 44% lower than the average of 1.15 kg/ha for conventional cotton growers; • The average field EIQ/ha is also significantly lower for GM IR cotton growers (53/ha for conventional growers compared to 21/ha for GM IR growers); • The total amount of ai used and its environmental impact (Table 49) have been respectively 2.7% (11,475 kg) and 3.6% lower (720,000 units) in 2005, than the levels that would have occurred if only conventional cotton had been planted; • Cumulatively since 1998, the volume of insecticide use is 2.9% lower (3.65 million kg) and the EIQ/ha load 3.9% lower (6.6 million units) than the amount that would have been used if GM IR technology had not been adopted. 79 Based on data from Quam and De Janvry (2005) 65
GM Crops: The First Ten Years Table 49. National level changes in insecticide ai use and field EIQ values for GM IR cotton in Argentina 1998-2005 Year ai decrease (kg) eiq savings (units) 1998 2,550 160,000 1999 6,120 384,000 2000 12,750 800,000 2001 5,100 320,000 2002 10,200 640,000 2003 29,580 1,856,000 2004 28,050 1,760,000 2005 11,475 720,000 Note: derived from sources including CASAFE and Kynetec % decrease in ai 0.3 0.8 3.3 1.1 5.4 17.6 9.6 2.7 % saving eiq 0.3 1.1 4.5 1.6 7.4 23.9 13.1 3.6 e) India The analysis presented below is based on typical spray regimes for GM IR and non GM IR cotton (source: Monsanto India). The respective differences for ai use and field EIQ values for GM IR and conventional cotton used are: • Conventional cotton: average volume of insecticide used was 3.57 kg/ha and a field EIQ/ ha value of 107/ha; • GM IR cotton: average volume of insecticide used was 1.44 kg/ha and a field EIQ/ha value of 54/ha. Based on these values the level of insecticide ai use and the total EIQ load, in 2005 was respectively 9.8% (2.76 million kg) and 8.3% (70.5 million EIQ/ha units) lower than would have been expected if the total crop had been conventional non GM cotton. Cumulatively, since 2002, the insecticide ai use was 3.7% lower (4.13 million kg) and the total EIQ load 3.1% lower (3.36 million EIQ/ha units). f) Other countries Cotton farmers in South Africa, Mexico and Columbia have also been using GM IR technology in recent years (respectively since 1998, 1996 and 2002). The plantings have, however been fairly small (in 2005, 17,300 ha in South Africa, 120,000 ha in Mexico and 28,000 in Columbia). In Mexico, there has been an annual average reduction in insecticide use over the 1996-2004 period of 15,650 kg of product used, which cumulatively since 1996 amounts to a reduction in use of 140,875 kg 80 . Analysis of the impact on insecticide use and the associated environmental 'foot print' are not presented for these crops because of the small scale and limited availability of insecticide usage data. 80 Source: Official report to the Ministry of Agriculture by Monsanto Comercial (2004) 66
Page 1 and 2:
I S A A A INTERNATIONAL SERVICE FOR
Page 3 and 4:
Published by: Copyright: Citation:
Page 5 and 6:
Contents 3.6.2 China ..............
Page 7 and 8:
List of Tables Table 37. Change in
Page 10 and 11:
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS E
Page 12 and 13:
Table 2. GM crop farm income benefi
Page 14 and 15:
Executive Summary and Conclusions
Page 16 and 17:
Executive Summary and Conclusions T
Page 18 and 19:
Table 8. Context of carbon sequestr
Page 20 and 21:
1 INTRODUCTION GM Crops: The First
Page 22 and 23:
GM Crops: The First Ten Years Figur
Page 24 and 25:
Figure 4. Global GM crop plantings
Page 26 and 27:
3 THE FARM LEVEL ECONOMIC IMPACT OF
Page 28 and 29:
• The annual total national farm
Page 30 and 31:
3.1.3 Brazil GM HT soybeans were pr
Page 32 and 33:
Table 14. Farm level income impact
Page 34 and 35: GM Crops: The First Ten Years Table
Page 36 and 37: 3.2.2 Canada GM Crops: The First Te
Page 38 and 39: 3.3.2 Other countries GM Crops: The
Page 42 and 43: Table 18. Farm level income impact
Page 54 and 55: 3.7.4 Insect resistant potatoes GM
Page 56 and 57: size. The analysis found that mean
Page 58 and 59: GM Crops: The First Ten Years soybe
Page 60 and 61: GM Crops: The First Ten Years c) Bu
Page 62 and 63: Table 28. Herbicide usage on soybea
Page 64 and 65: GM Crops: The First Ten Years a sma
Page 66 and 67: GM Crops: The First Ten Years Makin
Page 68 and 69: GM Crops: The First Ten Years Figur
Page 70 and 71: GM Crops: The First Ten Years aceto
Page 72 and 73: Table 38. Herbicide usage on cotton
Page 74 and 75: GM Crops: The First Ten Years At th
Page 76 and 77: GM Crops: The First Ten Years Figur
Page 80 and 81: GM Crops: The First Ten Years been
Page 86 and 87: GM Crops: The First Ten Years g) Su
Page 88 and 89: In terms of GHG each litre of tract
Page 90 and 91: GM Crops: The First Ten Years As we
Page 92 and 93: GM Crops: The First Ten Years using
Page 94 and 95: GM Crops: The First Ten Years b) So
Page 96 and 97: GM Crops: The First Ten Years a) Fu
Page 98 and 99: GM Crops: The First Ten Years b) So
Page 100 and 101: 4.2.7 Insect resistant cotton The c
Page 102 and 103: Table 63. Summary of carbon sequest
Page 104 and 105: Appendix Appendix 2: The Environmen
Page 106 and 107: Appendix environmental factor is eq
Page 108 and 109: Appendix 3: Additional information
Page 110 and 111: Typical herbicide regimes for GM HT
Page 112 and 113: Typical insecticide regimes for cot
Page 114 and 115: References Fernandez-Cornejo J & Mc
Page 116: ISBN 1-892456-41-9
show all

GM Crops: The First Ten Years - International Service for the ...

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?