[go: up one dir, main page]
IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ags/aaea02/19710.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Bt Cotton In Argentina: Analyzing Adoption And Farmers' Willingness To Pay

Author

Listed:
  • Qaim, Matin
  • de Janvry, Alain
Abstract
Unlike several other countries, where Bt cotton is being rapidly adopted, in Argentina technology diffusion has been rather slow. Based on recent survey data, it is shown that the technology significantly reduces insecticide applications and increases yields; however, these advantages are curbed by the high price charged for genetically modified seeds. Using the contingent valuation method, it is shown that farmer's average willingness to pay for Bt cotton is less than half the actual market price. A lower price would not only increase benefits for cotton growers, but could also multiply the profits of the monopoly seed producer, thus resulting in a Pareto improvement. Implications of the sub-optimal pricing strategy are discussed.

Suggested Citation

  • Qaim, Matin & de Janvry, Alain, 2002. "Bt Cotton In Argentina: Analyzing Adoption And Farmers' Willingness To Pay," 2002 Annual meeting, July 28-31, Long Beach, CA 19710, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
    • Handle: RePEc:ags:aaea02:19710
    DOI: 10.22004/ag.econ.19710
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/19710/files/sp02qa01.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.22004/ag.econ.19710?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Giancarlo Moschini & Harvey Lapan, 1997. "Intellectual Property Rights and the Welfare Effects of Agricultural R&D," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 79(4), pages 1229-1242.
    2. Pray, Carl & Ma, Danmeng & Huang, Jikun & Qiao, Fangbin, 2001. "Impact of Bt Cotton in China," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 29(5), pages 813-825, May.
    3. Cooper, Joseph C., 1997. "Combining Actual And Contingent Behavior Data To Model Farmer Adoption Of Water Quality Protection Practices," Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Western Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 22(1), pages 1-14, July.
    4. Michael Hanemann & John Loomis & Barbara Kanninen, 1991. "Statistical Efficiency of Double-Bounded Dichotomous Choice Contingent Valuation," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 73(4), pages 1255-1263.
    5. Adamowicz W. & Louviere J. & Williams M., 1994. "Combining Revealed and Stated Preference Methods for Valuing Environmental Amenities," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 26(3), pages 271-292, May.
    6. Bryan J. Hubbell & Michele C. Marra & Gerald A. Carlson, 2000. "Estimating the Demand for a New Technology: Bt Cotton and Insecticide Policies," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 82(1), pages 118-132.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Richard Bennett & Stephen Morse & Yousouf Ismael, 2006. "The economic impact of genetically modified cotton on South African smallholders: Yield, profit and health effects," Journal of Development Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 42(4), pages 662-677.
    2. Tsigkou, Stavroula & Klonaris, Stathis, 2020. "Eliciting Farmers' Willingness to Pay for Innovative Fertilizer Against Soil Salinity: Comparison of Two Methods in a Field Survey," International Journal of Agricultural Management, Institute of Agricultural Management, vol. 9, December.
    3. Carl E. Pray & Anwar Naseem, 2003. "Biotechnology R&D: Policy options to ensure access and benefits for the poor," Working Papers 03-08, Agricultural and Development Economics Division of the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO - ESA).
    4. Stavroula Tsigou & Stathis Klonaris, 2018. "Factors affecting farmers’ WTP for innovative fertilizer against soil salinity," Working Papers 2018-3, Agricultural University of Athens, Department Of Agricultural Economics.
    5. Guiyan Wang & Yuhong Wu & Wangsheng Gao & Michel Fok & Weili Liang, 2008. "Impact of Bt Cotton on the Farmer's Livelihood System in China," Post-Print halshs-00324390, HAL.
    6. Sadia Mansoor & Sobia Bashir & Muhammad Zubair, 2020. "Is Bt Gene Cotton Adoption Paying Off Farmers in Pakistan?," Asian Development Policy Review, Asian Economic and Social Society, vol. 8(1), pages 30-41, March.
    7. Maxwell, Brett J. & Wilson, William W. & Dahl, Bruce L., 2004. "Marketing Mechanisms In Gm Grains And Oilseeds," Agribusiness & Applied Economics Report 23639, North Dakota State University, Department of Agribusiness and Applied Economics.
    8. Elbehri, Aziz & Macdonald, Steve, 2004. "Estimating the Impact of Transgenic Bt Cotton on West and Central Africa: A General Equilibrium Approach," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 32(12), pages 2049-2064, December.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. John C. Whitehead & Subhrendu K. Pattanayak & George L. Van Houtven & Brett R. Gelso, 2008. "Combining Revealed And Stated Preference Data To Estimate The Nonmarket Value Of Ecological Services: An Assessment Of The State Of The Science," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 22(5), pages 872-908, December.
    2. Traxler, Greg, 2004. "The Economic Impacts of Biotechnology-Based Technological Innovations," ESA Working Papers 23806, Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, Agricultural Development Economics Division (ESA).
    3. Mooney, Daniel F. & Barham, Bradford L. & Lian, Chang, 2013. "Sustainable Biofuels, Marginal Agricultural Lands, and Farm Supply Response: Micro-Evidence for Southwest Wisconsin," 2013 Annual Meeting, August 4-6, 2013, Washington, D.C. 150510, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    4. Matuschke, Ira & Mishra, Ritesh R. & Qaim, Matin, 2007. "Adoption and Impact of Hybrid Wheat in India," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 35(8), pages 1422-1435, August.
    5. Qaim, M., 2004. "Bt Baumwolle in Argentinien: Verbreitung, Nutzen und Zahlungsbereitschaft der Bauern," Proceedings “Schriften der Gesellschaft für Wirtschafts- und Sozialwissenschaften des Landbaues e.V.”, German Association of Agricultural Economists (GEWISOLA), vol. 39.
    6. Sydorovych, Olha & Marra, Michele C., 2007. "A Genetically Engineered Crop's Impact on Pesticide Use: A Revealed-Preference Index Approach," Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Western Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 32(3), pages 1-16, December.
    7. W. Michael Hanemann, 1994. "Valuing the Environment through Contingent Valuation," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 8(4), pages 19-43, Fall.
    8. Richard T. Carson & Miko_aj Czajkowski, 2014. "The discrete choice experiment approach to environmental contingent valuation," Chapters, in: Stephane Hess & Andrew Daly (ed.), Handbook of Choice Modelling, chapter 9, pages 202-235, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    9. Frisvold, George B. & Reeves, Jeanne M., 2008. "The costs and benefits of refuge requirements: The case of Bt cotton," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 65(1), pages 87-97, March.
    10. Jin, Jianjun & Wang, Zhishi & Ran, Shenghong, 2006. "Comparison of contingent valuation and choice experiment in solid waste management programs in Macao," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 57(3), pages 430-441, May.
    11. Falck-Zepeda, Jose & Horna, Daniela & Smale, Melinda, 2007. "The economic impact and the distribution of benefits and risk from the adoption of insect resistant (Bt) cotton in West Africa," IFPRI discussion papers 718, International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI).
    12. Oehmke, James F. & Wolf, Christopher A., 2004. "Is Monsanto Leaving Money on the Table? Monopoly Pricing and Bt Cotton Value with Heterogeneous Adopters," Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics, Southern Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 36(3), pages 1-14, December.
    13. Jill J. McCluskey & Kristine M. Grimsrud & Hiromi Ouchi & Thomas I. Wahl, 2005. "Bovine spongiform encephalopathy in Japan: consumers' food safety perceptions and willingness to pay for tested beef," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 49(2), pages 197-209, June.
    14. Siikamaki, Juha & Layton, David F., 2007. "Discrete choice survey experiments: A comparison using flexible methods," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 53(1), pages 122-139, January.
    15. Matin Qaim & Greg Traxler, 2005. "Roundup Ready soybeans in Argentina: farm level and aggregate welfare effects," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 32(1), pages 73-86, January.
    16. Matty Demont & Marie Cerovska & Wim Daems & Koen Dillen & József Fogarasi & Erik Mathijs & František Muška & Josef Soukup & Eric Tollens, 2008. "Ex Ante Impact Assessment under Imperfect Information: Biotechnology in New Member States of the EU," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 59(3), pages 463-486, September.
    17. Gebreegziabher, Z. & Mekonnen, A. & Beyene, A.D. & Hagos, F., 2018. "Valuation of access to irrigation water in rural Ethiopia: application of choice experiment and contingent valuation methods," 2018 Conference, July 28-August 2, 2018, Vancouver, British Columbia 277168, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    18. Boxall, Peter C. & Adamowicz, Wiktor L. & Swait, Joffre & Williams, Michael & Louviere, Jordan, 1996. "A comparison of stated preference methods for environmental valuation," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 18(3), pages 243-253, September.
    19. Hareau, Guy G. & Mills, Bradford F. & Norton, George W., 2006. "The potential benefits of herbicide-resistant transgenic rice in Uruguay: Lessons for small developing countries," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 31(2), pages 162-179, April.
    20. Siikamaki, Juha & Layton, David F., 2001. "Logit Models For Pooled Contingent Valuation And Contingent Rating And Ranking Data: Valuing Benefits From Forest Biodiversity Conservation," 2001 Annual meeting, August 5-8, Chicago, IL 20616, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ags:aaea02:19710. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: AgEcon Search (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/aaeaaea.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.