ArticlePDF Available

Abstract and Figures

Abstract: Vitamin A enriched rice (Golden Rice) is a cost efficient solution that can substantially reduce health costs. Despite Golden Rice being available since early 2000, this rice has not been introduced in any country. Governments must perceive additional costs that overcompensate the benefits of the technology to explain the delay in approval. We develop a real option model including irreversibility and uncertainty about perceived costs and arrival of new information to explain a delay in approval. The model has been applied to the case of India. Results show the annual perceived costs have at least to be about USD 199 million per year for the last decade to explain the delay in approval of the technology. This is an indicator for the economic power of the opposition towards Golden Rice resulting in about 1.4 million life years lost over the past decade in India.
Content may be subject to copyright.
Environment and Development
Additional services for Environment and
Development Economics:
Email alerts: Click here
Subscriptions: Click here
Commercial reprints: Click here
Terms of use : Click here
The economic power of the Golden Rice
Justus Wesseler and David Zilberman
Environment and Development Economics / FirstView Article / January 2014, pp 1 - 19
DOI: 10.1017/S1355770X1300065X, Published online: 22 January 2014
Link to this article:
How to cite this article:
Justus Wesseler and David Zilberman The economic power of the Golden Rice
opposition . Environment and Development Economics, Available on CJO 2014
Request Permissions : Click here
Downloaded from, IP address: on 05 Feb 2014
Environment and Development Economics, page 1 of 19. © Cambridge University Press 2014
The economic power of the Golden Rice
Technische Universit¨at M¨unchen, Center of Life and Food Sciences
Weihenstephan, Weihenstephaner Steig 22, 85354, Freising, Germany.
Tel: +49 8161 715632. Fax: +49 8161 713030.
Department of Agricultural and Resource Economics, University of
California, Berkeley, USA. Email:
Submitted 4 March 2013; revised 18 October 2013; accepted 23 October 2013
ABSTRACT. Vitamin A enriched rice (Golden Rice) is a cost-efficient solution that can
substantially reduce health costs. Despite Golden Rice being available since early 2000,
this rice has not been introduced in any country. Governments must perceive additional
costs that overcompensate the benefits of the technology to explain the delay in approval.
We develop a real option model including irreversibility and uncertainty about perceived
costs and arrival of new information to explain a delay in approval. The model has
been applied to the case of India. Results show the annual perceived costs have to be
at least US$199 million per year approximately for the last decade to explain the delay in
approval of the technology. This is an indicator of the economic power of the opposition
towards Golden Rice resulting in about 1.4 million life years lost over the past decade
in India.
1. Introduction
‘So, if introduced on a large scale, golden rice can exacerbate malnutrition
and ultimately undermine food security.’ This statement by Greenpeace
(2012: 3) is in strong contradiction to the reported impacts of vitamin A
deficiency and the nutritional impacts of vitamin A enriched diets. More
than 125 million children under five years of age suffer from vitamin A
deficiency (VAD). Dietary VAD causes 250,000–500,000 children to go blind
each year.
More than half of the children who lose their sight because of VAD
die within a year of becoming blind. Additionally, VAD compromises
the immune systems of approximately 40 per cent of children under
the age of five in the developing world, greatly increasing the risk
The online version of this article is published within an Open Access environment
subject to the conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution licence http://
2Justus Wesseler and David Zilberman
of severe illnesses from common childhood infections. Further health
consequences include anemia, increased susceptibility to infection, and
poorer growth (West and Darnton-Hill,2008). Additionally, early child-
hood malnutrition has long-lasting effects that are difficult to reverse by
better nutrition in later life (World Health Organization,2001). Address-
ing VAD and zinc deficiency in nutrition has been ranked by the
Copenhagen Consensus (2008) as the number one problem in developing
countries for sustainable economic development and was reemphasized in
2012 (Copenhagen Consensus,2012).
There are two major channels through which nutrition may affect eco-
nomic development. Malnutrition limits (labor) productivity and effects
human capital accumulation. Firstly, there is convincing evidence from
past experience that nutritional status affects labor outcomes, particu-
larly productivity. While the exact mechanisms underlying these rela-
tionships are not entirely clear, experimental and observational studies
have documented sizeable effects of nutrition on productivity indicators
(Thomas and Frankenberg,2002). Fogel’s (1994) study of the economic and
health history of Europe illustrates the aforementioned relationship. At the
end of the 18th century in England and France, agricultural production,
and therefore food provision, was so low that approximately 20 per cent of
the population was incapable of working more than a few hours of light
work per day due to lacking food resources. Many people were chroni-
cally malnourished and died young, which resulted in premature losses of
their human capital. Only the agricultural productivity increases in the 19th
century permitted an escape from this developmental trap, and enabled
individual productivity gains as well as increases in productivity on a
macroeconomic level (Deaton,2003). Similarly, Doblhammer and Vaupel
(2001) investigate the relationship between month of birth and remaining
life expectancy at age 50 in Austria, Denmark and Australia. Their results
indicate that health appears to depend on factors like nutrition in utero or
early childhood. These effects are attributed to the effects of intrauterine
nutrition more than half a century ago, particularly to the seasonal avail-
ability of high-quality food like fresh fruit and vegetables (Deaton,2003).
Secondly, malnutrition may also affect economic development indi-
rectly via hampering cognitive abilities and human capital develop-
ment. Richards et al. (2002), for example, use birth weight and cognitive
indicators of the British 1946 birth cohort and find that birth weight
was positively associated with cognition up to age 26, and with the
likelihood of obtaining advanced educational qualifications. Similarly,
Currie and Hyson (1999) find that malnutrition, measured by low birth
weights, has significant long-term effects on health status, educational
attainments and labor market outcomes. Moreover, Case and Paxson (2006)
use stature of US and UK citizens as an indicator for their quality of diet
during childhood and find that nutrition is positively associated with cog-
nitive ability, which is rewarded in the labor market. They show that taller
children have higher average cognitive test scores, and that these test scores
explain a large portion of the height premium in earnings. In an historical
study, Baten et al. (2010) show that nutrition during early childhood mat-
tered for labor market outcomes: individuals who grew up in times and
Environment and Development Economics 3
places characterized by high food prices tended to acquire fewer cognitive
skills and were more likely to pursue occupations with limited intellectual
Vitamin A enriched rice has the potential to address the problem of
micronutrient deficiencies in early childhood. Rice produces β-carotene
in the leaves but not in the grain, where the biosynthetic pathway is
turned off during plant development. In Golden Rice, two genes have been
inserted into the rice genome by genetic engineering, which would not
have been possible by traditional breeding, to restart the carotenoid biosyn-
thetic pathway leading to the production and accumulation of β-carotene
in the grains. The intensity of the golden color is an indicator of the con-
centration of β-carotene in the endosperm. Since a prototype Golden Rice
was developed in 1999, new lines with higher β-carotene content have
been generated. The breeding goal is to provide the recommended daily
allowance of vitamin A in 100–200 g of β-carotene containing rice. This
corresponds to the amount of rice eaten daily by children living in rice-
based societies, such as India, Vietnam and Bangladesh. In other countries,
Golden Rice could still be a valuable complement to children’s diets, thus
contributing to the reduction of clinical and sub-clinical VAD-related dis-
eases. The different forms of Golden Rice contain between 1.6 and 35 μg
β-carotene per gram of rice. A recent study with children has shown that
the bioavailability of provitamin A from Golden Rice is as effective as
pure β-carotene in oil, and far better than spinach in providing vitamin
A to children. A daily intake of 60 g of rice (half a cup) would provide
about 60 per cent of the Chinese Recommended Nutrient Intake of vita-
min A for 6–8-year-old children and be sufficient to prevent vitamin A
malnutrition (Tang et al.,2009,2012).
Despite the expected nutritional benefits of Golden Rice, the technology
faces strong opposition. Opponents to the technology argue that a sufficient
daily vitamin A supply would require a two-year-old child to eat about 3 kg
of rice per day; alternative and cheaper strategies would exist to address
VAD and in the end the project is only an industry ploy to open doors for
other genetically modified (GM) crops (Greenpeace,2005). The argument
about the daily intake has been dismissed as this assumes Golden Rice
would be the only source of vitamin A (Enserink,2008). Suggested alterna-
tives such as alternative diets, industrial fortification or supplements have
been available for many years but have not solved the problem (Stein et al.,
2008). Hence, the possibility exists that Golden Rice may reduce VAD and
save millions of lives, while other strategies have not been so successful.
Proof of concept of enhancing the vitamin A content of rice has existed
since the late 1990s and the expectation was that by 2002 the first commer-
cial rice varieties would be available. Developing a commercial product
has not been delayed by solving a number of intellectual property right
issues. The major stumbling block was – and still is – the regulation of
genetically engineered (GE) crops. In 2000, the Golden Rice project started
a public–private partnership with Syngenta to use their expertise in devel-
oping dossiers for the approval requirements of GE crops to ease problems
caused by national regulations. Ten years have passed and still Golden Rice
has neither been approved for cultivation in India and Bangladesh, two of
4Justus Wesseler and David Zilberman
the target countries of the Golden Rice Humanitarian Project, nor in other
countries where its varieties are under development (Potrykus,2010a,b).
Many argue that the additional regulations for approval required for
GE crops compared with non-GE crops, and Golden Rice in particular,
are not supported by science, and hence are overregulated. Justification
for current regulation is based on the notion that the technology leads to
‘unpredictable and uncontrolled modification of the genome’; this argu-
ment ignores the fact that all traditional breeding has been and is doing
exactly the same (Baudo et al.,2006;Shewry et al.,2007;Batista et al.,2008;
Herman et al.,2009). Although there have been studies showing the safety
consequences of GM crops for rats, a careful assessment of those studies
did not confirm the claims being made. Further, extensive reviews found
no support for adverse human health effects from GM crops (Bennett et al.,
2013). Developing Golden Rice requires the use of selectable marker genes.
Regulatory authorities prefer that antibiotic selectable marker genes be
deleted (e.g., Committee on Agriculture,2012). This is technically possible,
but requires substantial time and effort despite the fact that there is a wealth
of scientific literature documenting that the antibiotic marker genes in
use have no effect on consumer and environmental safety (Ramessar et al.,
2007). Furthermore, requests for additional regulation are often based on
the precautionary principle, while a strong interpretation of the precaution-
ary principle has been shown to be a logically inconsistent line of reasoning
for extra regulation (van den Belt,2003),1while there is wide agreement
among economists that optimal regulations related to food and environ-
mental safety should be based on benefit-costs analyses (Arrow et al.,1996).
Even the definition of what constitutes a GE crop is controversial from a
scientific point of view (Herring,2007).
Ex ante assessments have been done for Golden Rice in India (Stein et al.,
2008) and the Philippines (Zimmermann and Qaim,2004). These studies
show that in India the costs per disability-adjusted life year (DALY) saved
between US$3.1 and US$19.4: much lower than for alternative intervention
strategies. The net social benefits for the Philippines have been calculated
to be in the range of US$16 to US$88 million per year. These numbers are
now expected to be on the lower side of this range as only direct health
impacts have been considered and improvements in vitamin A enhanced
rice breeding since 2004 were not included.
Despite the wealth of information available about the health benefits
of Golden Rice, national governments, which are bound by the rules and
1According to Pascal’s wager: ‘Given known but nonzero probability of God’s exis-
tence and the infinity of the reward of an eternal life, the rational option would be
to conduct one’s earthly life as if God exists’ (van den Belt,2003: 1124). The con-
tradiction is the many gods example: ‘Consider the possible existence of another
deity than God, say Odin. If Odin is jealous, he will resent our worship of God,
and we will have to pay an infinite price for our mistake. Never mind that Odin’s
existence may not seem likely or plausible to us. It is sufficient that we cannot
exclude the possibility that he exists with absolute certainty. Therefore, the same
logic of Pascal’s wager would lead us to adopt the opposite conclusion not to
worship God. Pascal’s argument, then, cannot be valid’ (van den Belt,2003: 1124).
Environment and Development Economics 5
regulations on the use of GE crops, are reluctant to approve its introduction
The objectives of this paper are to identify the costs and benefits of regu-
lating Golden Rice, paying particular attention to possible overregulation,
and to calibrate the model for Golden Rice in India. The simple model we
present considers uncertainties related to the perceived costs by national
governments of the technology and approval time, i.e., over time, addi-
tional information becomes available. This allows us to identify the costs
of delaying the approval and in particular the perceived costs by national
regulators equivalent to the costs imposed on society by the opposition to
Golden Rice. Alternatively, ex ante assessments show substantial benefits
of Golden Rice, but governments are still reluctant to approve the techno-
logy. Hence, there must be additional perceived costs for governments not
approving the technology. This is the first study calculating those costs for
the case of India. These perceived costs have been treated as being irre-
versible for being cautious. Hence, the opportunity to introduce Golden
Rice has been valued following the quasi-option-value approach intro-
duced by Arrow and Fisher (1974). Arrow and Fisher, among others (e.g.,
Dixit and Pindyck,1994;Wesseler,2009), show that decisions under uncer-
tainty and irreversible benefits and costs either understate or overstate net
benefits if irreversibility effects are ignored.
Results show that it pays to bring forward new arguments against
the introduction of Golden Rice when the technology is close to being
approved. The Indian case shows that the perceived costs by national gov-
ernments are substantially larger than the costs of introducing Golden Rice,
and has caused and continues to cause the death of thousands of children.
2. The real option model of perceived costs
The problem is described as follows. A benevolent developer of a vita-
min A biofortification strategy in the form of Golden Rice, henceforth
called the Golden Rice strategy (GRS) such as, for example, the ‘Human-
itarian Golden Rice’ project, provides the technology for free. The benefits
of the program are known to the developer as well as the national gov-
ernment and depend on the government’s implementation strategy, the
costs of which are known. The acceptance of the technology depends on
national governments. The introduction of the GRS (the implementation
strategy) costs the national government one-off administrative set-up costs
and annual costs of running the strategy. This set-up serves as the reference
model. If the benefits outweigh the costs of the GRS, a welfare maximiz-
ing regulator would implement the GRS. It is well known in the literature
that regulators, other government agencies or governments in general do
not follow this simple benefit-cost metric. Their objective function may not
only be based on the direct benefits and costs of the GRS. A number of polit-
ical economy models have been developed to analyze policies related to
the introduction of GE crops in more detail considering two or more lobby
groups (e.g., Graff et al.,2009;Swinnen and Vandemoortele,2010) and the
role of media (Vigani and Olper,2014). Apel (2010) has argued that an
6Justus Wesseler and David Zilberman
anti-genetically modified organism (GMO) strategy has been a successful
fundraising strategy for environmental lobby groups such as Greenpeace
or Friends of the Earth. The role of anti-GMO lobby groups and their strong
influence on decision making, particularly in developing countries, has
been well described by political scientists (e.g., Paarlberg,2008;Herring,
2010). Lobby groups with capital stocks at risk in the face of agricultural
innovations use the political systems to protect their interests (Graff et al.,
2013). Decision makers may consider the arguments raised by opponents
for reasons of re-election, administrative power, budgetary power, side-
payments and more. In the end, whatever the specific reasons might be
and whatever the detailed political economy process may look like, the
final result is that decision makers take additional costs into account that
result in the delay of the approval.2These costs we call the perceived costs
– a term we use as those costs cannot be observed directly, and are a result
of the political economy process of the regulatory decision.
If the inclusion of the perceived costs results in the delay of an approval,
benefits of the GRS are foregone. We call the foregone benefits caused by a
delay in approval the economic power of the opposition to a GRS.
We now develop the model to assess the economic power in more detail.
The approval decision by the national government is exogenous to the
developer as are the set-up and annual costs. At time t=0 the govern-
ment’s view is that perceived costs, Gc, of introducing the GRS exist and
they are high, Gc0, while other benefits and costs discussed in more
detail below are assumed to be known. This assumption is a simplifica-
tion but can be justified by the studies investigating the costs and benefits
of introducing the GRS. Hence, all remaining uncertainty is summarized
under perceived costs. Over time, further information about the perceived
costs arrive and at time κeither the strategy will be successful and per-
ceived costs not be confirmed, Gc=0 with probability q, or confirmed to
be high, Gc0 with probability (1 – q). Hence, the introduction mainly
depends on the perceived costs of implementing the GRS. Based on that,
the national government may decide the strategy will be introduced imme-
diately (I) or postponed (P). Uncertainty about perceived costs will be
resolved at some future point in time κ>0. At κ>0 the national govern-
ment will know whether or not their perceived costs have been confirmed.
At time t=0 the arrival of κ>0 is uncertain to the government and
hence a random variable. k(0,)is the date at which uncertainty about
perceived costs is resolved; it follows from the exponential distribution
f) =hehκ(Taylor and Karlin,1984), with E) =1/h, where his the
hazard rate.3
2A delay is equivalent to a temporary ban as commonly observed in many coun-
tries. Regulatory decisions are almost never final. The decisions can be challenged
in court and in particular if new evidence challenging the current status is pre-
sented. Also, public opinion may change over time, influencing the view of the
regulatory body.
3The exponential distribution has a couple of attractive features for models with
arrival of information; an important feature is that it allows analytical tractability
of the model.
Environment and Development Economics 7
This specification is not that restrictive as it will allow identifying
threshold levels for perceived costs as shown below. The specification of
the model considers the inherent uncertainty decision makers face as well
as the fact that new information arrives over time, but that the specific point
in time when information will be available is uncertain.
The health benefits of introducing the GRS are in the form of improved
vitamin A supply. These benefits increase over time via the distribution
of the seeds. As commonly done, we assume a logistic functional form
for the diffusion of the Golden Rice seed (t)=ρmax
1+exp(αρβρt), where the
slope parameter βρis known as the natural rate of diffusion, as it measures
the rate at which adoption ρincreases with time t. The parameter αρis a
constant of integration and the ceiling ρmax is the long-run upper limit on
adoption. Benefits do follow a similar logistic pattern to the adoption curve
ρ(t)with parameters αb,βband ρmax . The health benefits are divided into
annual irreversible, ib, and reversible, rb, health benefits with subscript b
for benefits. Irreversible benefits refer to the benefits for children that in
case of VAD could not be reversed in later life, such as premature death,
blindness, stagnant growth, and cognitive capabilities, while reversible
benefits refer to VAD symptoms that can be cured or at least reduced at
every stage of life via an increase in vitamin A supply, such as diarrhea
or infections like measles (West and Darnton-Hill,2008). We have for the
annual irreversible benefits ibt (t)=ibmax
1+exp(αbβbt)and annual reversible
benefits rbt (t)=rbmax
1+exp(αbβbt). We get for the total irreversible benefits
0i(t)eμtdt and for the total reversible benefits Rb=
where μis the discount rate. From this we can deduct the average annual
irreversible health benefits, ib=Ibμand the average annual reversible
health benefits, rb=Rbμ.
The present value of the GRS benefits can be written as
ibeμtdt +
The costs of introducing the GRS from the government perspective include
irreversible one-time administrative set-up costs for starting the GRS cam-
paign, Ic, average annual reversible costs for running the campaign, rc,and
additional irreversible perceived costs of the GRS, Gc, with subscript cfor
indicating costs:
The state of nature and related benefits and costs the government faces can
be summarized as follows:
The net-present-value (NPV) of immediate introduction at t=0 with
subscript Ifor immediate:
8Justus Wesseler and David Zilberman
Postponed introduction but perceived costs are not correct, valued at t=0
with subscript Pfor postponed and subscript efor error:
0(IbIc)eμκ +
(rbrc)eμtdtf(κ)dκ, (4a)
Postponed introduction but perceived costs are correct with subscript ne
for no error:
where subscript ne indicates that the perceived costs in this case are at least
as high that B<Cne holds.
The value of a postponed GRS valued at t=0is
NPV(GRSP)=max[NPV(GRSPe), 0].(6)
Considering this setting, the developer faces two possibilities: either the
GRS will be introduced immediately or postponed until time κhas arrived.
On the one hand, the immediate introduction bears the risk that the GRS
results in high perceived costs Gc. On the other hand, postponing the GRS
might cause foregone benefits of saved lives and health, NPV(GRSI)
NPV(GRSP). If the decision is postponed, the regulator gains additional
information about the perceived costs and will know the true costs of
implementing the GRS. Hence, the net benefits depend on weighing the
benefits and costs of immediate against postponed introduction. Under this
setting, whether or not the GRS will be introduced at time κprovides the
following option value of the GRS strategy:
The set-up allows us to identify the threshold when a national gov-
ernment might immediately introduce the GRS, which is NPV(GRSI)
NPV(GRSP)>0, and yields:
Solving for B:
And solving for Gc:
where NPVG=BIcRc.
Environment and Development Economics 9
According to the result of equation (9), immediate introduction of the
GRS will be economical if the reversible and irreversible benefits are larger
than the irreversible and reversible costs plus the irreversible perceived
costs of introducing GRS weighted by the leverage factor μ+h
μ+(1q)h>1. The
first part of the right-hand side of equation (9) captures the standard costs
as part of a benefit-cost analysis; the second part adds the perceived costs.
One unit of perceived irreversible costs of introducing the GRS weighs
more than one unit of other costs. This can be explained by the fact that
Gcis uncertain, and due to the uncertainty about the perceived costs those
costs weigh more than the other costs. This is an effect well known within
the real option literature on regulation (e.g., Hennessy and Moschini,2006;
Ansink and Wesseler,2009).
Equivalently, equation (10) shows that fewer perceived costs will be
needed to outweigh the benefits minus the other reversible and irreversible
costs for explaining a delay in approval. Using this equation, we can iden-
tify a minimum value for the economic power of the opposition towards
the GRS.
We can compare these results with three alternative specifications for
identifying the relative importance of uncertainty about perceived costs
and uncertainty about the arrival date of information or date of decision: no
uncertainty, uncertainty about approval date only, and uncertainty about
perceived costs only. The first specification excludes any uncertainty, the
approval will only be delayed, and at approval time a,GCwill be zero.
As in the previous specification, known benefits and costs remain con-
stant over time. In this case the threshold value G
cn with subscript nfor
no uncertainty yields:
cn =NPVGeμa1
The second specification adds uncertainty over the delay of approval. In
this case the threshold value G
ch with subscript hfor uncertainty about
approval date yields:
ch =NPVGμ
The third specification includes uncertainty about perceived costs only, the
approval decision will only be delayed to a future point in time a, but from
today’s perspective the perceived costs will not be confirmed with prob-
ability q. This yields, for the threshold value of G
cq with subscript qfor
uncertainty about the presence of perceived costs,
cq =NPVGeμaq
Comparing equations (10)to(13) we can observe that including uncertainty
about the approval date results in the lowest threshold value for per-
ceived costs as long as eμa>μ+h
hfollowed by excluding any uncertainty,
10 Justus Wesseler and David Zilberman
whereas considering uncertainty about perceived costs only results in a
higher threshold than considering uncertainty about perceived costs in
combination with uncertainty about the arrival time of additional infor-
mation about whether or not the perceived costs will be confirmed. While
the differences between equation (11) and (12), and (10) and (13)aresub-
stantial for q=0.5, the differences between equation (10) and (13), and
equation (11) and (12) are less pronounced and for some parameter values
may even be reversed. In essence, ignoring any uncertainty substantially
undervalues the perceived costs, while ignoring uncertainty about deci-
sion dates slightly overvalues the perceived costs. This will become more
obvious in section 3 where the model will be calibrated for the case of India.
2.1. Regulations and delay strategies
The result of equation (9) also provides economic insight into the success
of delay strategies of opponents to the GRS. One might be surprised by
the fact that technology of this kind will not immediately be introduced
but delayed by several means. Many developing countries either have or
are discussing additional regulations for the approval of GE seed varieties.
Most countries including those targeted for VAD have stringent biosafety
regulations for the approval of GM crops (Paarlberg,2008). The compliance
with those regulations costs additional time and delays introduction. Take
as an example India, whose government implemented a working group
to assess biotechnology, which recommended that the Indian Government
ban all GM food crops from cultivation, thereby stirring a debate about the
approval process of GM crops.
By looking at equation (9), an increase in h(∂( μ+h
μ+(1q)h)/∂h>0), equiv-
alent to availability of information about the perceived costs will soon
become available, increases the weight of the perceived costs. In this sense,
it pays for opponents to again raise concerns about perceived costs via dif-
ferent forms of protest or new but often unfounded claims about negative
implications, when a decision to introduce the GRS is soon to be made.
This is observed not only for Golden Rice, but in general for the approval
of GE crops in many developing countries (e.g., Paarlberg,2008 for Africa;
Herring,2010,2012 for India) as well as the European Union (Herring,2007;
Wesseler et al.,2012).
3. Calibration of the model: the foregone benefits
The previous results will be used to quantify the foregone benefits of a
delayed introduction of the GRS as well as the perceived costs by the Gov-
ernment of India. The model will be calibrated for India thanks to the study
by Stein et al. (2008), in which detailed information about potential benefits
and costs of the GRS for India are available. We consider the time period
from 2002 when the technology was available and could have been intro-
duced. For the purpose of our analysis, irreversible and reversible benefits
and costs have been calculated based on Stein (2006; personal communi-
cation, 2013) and Stein et al. (2008), while the numbers employed for the
‘pessimistic scenarios’ have been on the lower side.
Environment and Development Economics 11
The benefits of the GRS are the reduced health costs of VAD. Those
benefits, similar to other health benefits, are commonly assessed by cal-
culating the DALYs (Murray and Lopez,1996). The current burden of VAD
has been calculated with about 2.3 million DALYs per year (over a 10-year
period: about 23 million DALYs ignoring changes in the Indian popula-
tion) (Stein et al.,2008, table 4). These include the burden of night blindness,
corneal scars, blindness caused by corneal scars, measles and mortality of
children five years old and younger, and night blindness for pregnant and
lactating women. Corneal scars and blindness caused by corneal scars of
children five years old and younger are VAD-related burdens that cannot
be reversed and are considered to be irreversible. Reducing those burdens
through the GRS is an irreversible benefit. Further, reducing child mortality
through the GRS has been considered an irreversible benefit too; accord-
ing to the numbers provided by Stein (2006, table A3), this amounts to
about 71,600 child deaths annually.
The other health burdens can be reduced through the GRS. The benefits
can be considered to be reversible as they normally do not result in health
problems in later life. Using the information provided by Stein (2006), the
share of irreversible and reversible health benefits can be calculated. About
74.4 and 25.6 per cent of the health benefits can be considered to be irre-
versible and reversible, respectively. Please note that the absolute numbers
are on the lower side as a number of health effects for which a causal link
has not yet been fully established have not been considered, such as stunted
growth. Further, as an economic value of a DALY, a rather low value of
US$500 has been used in the study. A low value can be justified in order
not to overestimate the benefits of the GRS, but places a low value on the
average statistical value of life and higher values would further increase
the economic benefits of a GRS.4
On the costs side, a number of cost items have been discussed within
the literature. These include research and development costs at the inter-
national and national level but also costs for launching a media campaign
to introduce the GRS and annual costs for maintenance breeding. While
the costs for the media campaign will definitely arise and will be addi-
tional costs for the government, the annual costs for maintenance breeding
are less obvious if they are additional. The media campaign, called social
marketing, will be needed at the beginning when the GRS is introduced.
The costs are treated as irreversible as they are sunk and will not matter at
a later stage whether or not to continue the GRS, while the maintenance
breeding costs still matter. Maintenance breeding by national agricul-
ture research centers is a regular activity. If the Golden Rice trait were
to be been introduced in Indian rice lines, they would be part of the
ongoing maintenance breeding and additional costs would not arise. On
the other hand, one can argue that the efforts for maintenance breeding
4A more detailed discussion on calculating DALYs within the debate on a GRS
and other biofortification strategies has been provided by Qaim et al. (2007). A
criticism on the use of DALYs to allocate resources for health projects can be found
in King and Bertino (2008).
12 Justus Wesseler and David Zilberman
Table 1. DALYs, benefits and costs of a Golden Rice Strategy to address Vitamin
A deficiency in India, costs of delay, and minimum perceived costs
Benefits and costs in present values DALY (’000) US$ (’000)
Irreversible health benefits (74.42%) 2,071,601
Reversible health benefits (25.58%) 711,999
Irreversible costs (social marketing) 15,554
Reversible costs (maintenance breeding) 4,292
Net-present-value (as of beginning of 2002) 2,763,755
Net-present-value (as of beginning of 2012,
valued at beginning of 2002)
DALY saved if introduced in 2002 5,567
DALY saved (as of beginning of 2012, valued
at beginning of 2002)
DALY lost over the past decade 1,425 (2,041)a
Notes:aDALY not discounted.
might increase as the number of rice lines has increased. Therefore cost
for maintenance breeding has been considered and treated as annual
reversible costs. According to Stein (personal communication, 2013), these
costs have been assessed to be about US$15,553,610 and about US$125,000
for the social marketing and the additional annual maintenance breeding
costs, respectively. Table 1summarizes the benefits and costs used for the
Using the benefits and costs provided under the ‘pessimistic scenario’,
implying a low impact of the GRS, provides a net-present-value for
NPV(GRSI)(number in thousand US$):5
NPV(GRSI)=2,071,601 15,554 Gc+711,999 4,292
=2,763,755 Gc.(14)
The value for NPV(GRSP)=q(BIcRc)h
μ+h, using a value for hof 0.1, equiv-
alent to an expected decision being made after 10 years, value for qof 0.5,
and a discount rate of three per cent in discrete time (2.955 per cent in con-
tinuous time) as also used by Stein (2006) and commonly done for such
kinds of health benefit assessments, provides the following result in US$:
NPV(GRSP)=0.5(2,071,601 15,554 +711,99 4,292)0.1
0.02955 +0.1
5Please note that we use an infinite stream of annual benefits and costs while Stein
(2006) uses a 30-year period. Even for the 30-year period the benefits of the tech-
nology are larger than the costs in the ‘pessimistic’ scenario. In this case, gains
from waiting do not exist if perceived costs are zero.
Environment and Development Economics 13
Using equation (10), the critical value G
Cin US$:
=2,763,7550.02955 +0.5·0.1
0.03 +0.1=1,697,152,214.(16)
This threshold level of about US$1.7 billion is substantial, or if annualized
over a 10-year period is about US$199 million per year, and is an indicator
of the economic power of GMO opposition in India. This is a minimum
value as this only indicates what perceived costs at least have to be in order
to explain a delay in approval following the specification of the model.
A comparison with the two alternative specifications discussed in
section 2 provides the following threshold value in case of no uncertainty
by using equation (11):
cn =NPVGeμa1
eμa=2,763,755 e0.2955 1
e0.2955 =707,261,628 (17)
In case of uncertainty with respect to the approval date only provides the
following threshold value in US$ by using equation (12):
ch =NPVGμ
μ+h=2,763,755 0.02995
0.02995 +0.1=630,549,798.(18)
In case of uncertainty with respect to the perceived costs only provides the
following threshold value in US$ by using equation (13):
cq =NPVGeμaq
eμa=2,763,755 e0.2955 0.5
e0.2955 =1,735,508,129.
The differences in the weighing factors between the four specifications
are substantial when comparing the results of equation (16)to(19). The
weighing factor in equation (17) is 0.26 and 0.23 in equation (18), while in
equation (16) the factor is 0.61 and 0.63 in equation (19). The difference
in the weighing factors between equation (17) and (18), and equation (16)
and (19) is a factor ranging between 2.40 and 2.75; the difference between
these sets of equations is less pronounced with a factor of 1.12 and 1.02,
respectively. A summary and comparison of the results with respect to the
different model specification is provided in table 2.
The results also illustrate the importance of information timing. The
importance of perceived costs increases the sooner the date of new infor-
mation arrives (figure 1). We can observe a sharp increase in the leverage
effect for values of hbelow about 0.5 (two years). Figure 1and equation (10)
show that the leverage effect increases with an increase in q.
The reported results are the minimum amount based on the pessimistic
or worst case scenario reported by Stein et al. (2008), who also report ben-
efits and costs for an optimistic scenario. In that case the threshold level
14 Justus Wesseler and David Zilberman
Table 2. Results of different model specifications
ch G
cn G
Threshold level (US$) 630,549,798 707,261,628 1,697,152,214 1,735,508,129
Weighing factor of Gc0.2281 0.2559 0.6141 0.6280
Comparison of weighing factors
cq over G
ch 1.1217 2.6915 2.7524
cq over G
cn 2.3996 2.4538
cq over G
ch, alternative specification with uncertainty about approval date and
no uncertainty about perceived costs; G
cn, alternative specification with no
uncertainty about perceived costs and approval date; G
c, specification with
uncertainty about perceived costs and uncertainty about arrival date of infor-
mation about perceived costs; G
cq , alternative specification with uncertainty
about perceived costs but certain arrival date of confirmation.
0.0000 0.5000 1.0000 1.5000 2.0000
Leverage Factor
h -value
Leverage Facto
Leverage Facto
Leverage Facto
Figure 1. Increase in leverage factor with a decrease in arrival time of new information
for different q-values (μ=0.03)
increases to about US$11.6 billion, or if annualized over a 10-year period to
about US$1,360 million per year.6
4. Discussion and conclusion
Nutritional and economic ex ante assessment studies of a GRS have shown
that Golden Rice can reduce VAD-related mortalities and diseases at less
cost than alternative strategies discussed in the literature. Previous studies
for India have shown that about 204,000 life years can be saved annu-
ally. Golden Rice was expected to be introduced in 2002. Golden Rice has
6Details of the optimistic calculation are available upon request from the authors.
Environment and Development Economics 15
not yet been approved in any country, including India. According to our
calculations, the delay over the last 10 years has caused losses of at least
1,424,680 life years for India, ignoring indirect health costs of VAD.
The differences in net present value from a 10-year delay are about
US$707 million. This difference does not fully capture the minimum
amount of perceived costs that the Government of India places on the intro-
duction of a GRS. Considering uncertainty and irreversibility substantially
increases the minimum amount of these perceived costs. Our calculation
shows that the additional perceived costs by the Government of India are
at least US$1.7 billion (about US$199 million annually).
This is a substantial amount and reflects the economic power of the
opposition against the introduction of Golden Rice and explains why it is
more difficult to convince regulators when a strong vocal opposition exists
that mainly stirs uncertainty about the GRS.
The comparison with alternative specifications shows that uncertainty
about the irreversible costs is economically substantially more important
than uncertainty about a specific date. Understanding and quantifying
the causes of uncertainty about irreversible costs seems to be economi-
cally more important for assessing decision making than uncertainty with
respect to the timing of decision making or the arrival of new information
in general. Uncertainty with respect to the arrival of new information κ
has been modeled by using an exponential distribution, which is mem-
oryless and hence constant with respect to time. Other functional forms
such as a Weibull or log-normal distribution are not necessarily memory-
less (Billingsley,2012). Nevertheless, we expect that the quality of the result
will not change, but leave it for further research to assess the implications
in more detail.
The size of the perceived costs is substantially larger, 85 times, than the
cost of implementing the GRS. Having a better understanding of the polit-
ical economy behind the perceived costs and how to reduce them seems to
be economically much more important than additional investigations into
the costs of social marketing and maintenance breeding.
The results further show that it pays for those opposing the GRS to
raise concerns about the technology the sooner a decision by regulators
is expected. The leverage factor of the perceived costs increases the closer
the point of decision making is. This explains why the opposition to the
GRS has substantial power and indicates that it will be difficult for those
supporting the technology to change the view on perceived costs. In this
context it is not so important to provide factual evidence, but to raise
uncertainty. The opposition to GRS in India was able to link the GRS
with the overall debate over GMOs in general (Enserink,2008). Narratives
about farmer suicides and dead sheep linked to GM cotton cultivation,
environmental damages of Bt eggplant, and health damages linked to
antibiotic marker genes are used to stir uncertainty among decision mak-
ers. Never mind that the narratives have not been correct (Herring,2010),
keeping them alive is sufficient. It has also been argued that the GRS is
only an industry public relations strategy as the multinational company
Syngenta is involved in further developing the technology to convince a
skeptical society about the benefits of GM crops. If Golden Rice receives
16 Justus Wesseler and David Zilberman
approval, other GM crops can be introduced more easily. In this case
uniform regulation – i.e., to ban the cultivation of all GM food crops –
might be a cost-effective approach to avoid the introduction of potentially
more ‘dangerous’ crops. While this argument has received support within
the environmental economics literature (e.g., Kolstad,1987), as identifying
the marginal benefits and damage costs of a technology can be very costly,
an important difference needs to be considered. Real damages to the envi-
ronment from technologies assessed within the environmental economics
literature have been demonstrated, such as damages from sulfate dioxide
emission from steel factories or nitrogen emissions from intensive agricul-
ture, while in the case of GM crops, net environmental benefits have been
reported (e.g., Wesseler et al.,2011;Bennett et al.,2013).
One may then ask how new technologies can be introduced, if it is so
easy to block them. There will always be a small, vocal group oppos-
ing a new technology. On the one hand, this is correct. Introducing new
technologies will become more difficult. The advances being made over
the past decade in information and communication systems reduce the
costs of organizing the opposition as well as the costs of communicating
technology-related uncertainties. On the other hand, uncertainties over a
new technology can be balanced by uncertainties over not having access
to a new technology stressed by a group of stakeholders as powerful as
the opposition. This seems to explain why transgenic crops have been
introduced within the US but not in Europe (Graff et al.,2013).
A countervailing power supporting the GRS and stirring uncertainties
about not introducing the GRS has not been explicitly considered within
the model presented, as this is currently not present within the GRS debate.
The GRS has been developed by scientists. Scientists have the tendency to
argue based on facts and not fiction, making it more difficult to be a coun-
tervailing power against the opposition to Golden Rice. Also, uncertainties
and irreversibilities about the benefits and the other costs of the GRS can be
included in the model. As a worst case scenario has been employed with
respect to those benefits and costs, modifications of the model in the afore-
mentioned direction will increase the calculated perceived costs. Further,
recent nutritional studies show the factors translating β-carotene of Golden
Rice into vitamin A are larger than expected (Tan g et al.,2012).
One question that remains to be answered within this debate is: what are
the incentives of the opposition to the GRS in India? This has not yet been
well investigated empirically. Apel (2010) argues that this is driven by the
financial support the opposition receives. A small industry has developed
around the opposition to transgenic crops that survives mainly on dona-
tions and has to keep the debate about the risks of the technology alive.
This strategy seems to be a successful strategy albeit, as the case of Golden
Rice shows, at the cost of the lives of several thousand children.
Ansink, E. and J. Wesseler (2009), ‘Quantifying type I and type II errors in decision-
making under uncertainty: the case of GM crops’, Letters in Spatial and Resource
Sciences 2: 61–66.
Environment and Development Economics 17
Apel, A. (2010), ‘The costly benefits of opposing agricultural biotechnology’, New
Biotechnology 27: 635–640.
Arrow, K.J. and A.C. Fisher (1974), ‘Environmental preservation, uncertainty, and
irreversibility’, Quarterly Journal of Economics 88: 312–319.
Arrow, K., M. Cropper, G. Eads, et al. (1996), ‘Is there a role for benefit-
cost analysis in environmental, health, and safety regulation?’, Science 272:
Baten, J., D. Crayen, and H.-J. Voth (2010), ‘Poor, hungry and ignorant: numeracy
and the impact of high food prices in industrializing Britain, 1780–1850’, Univer-
sity of Tuebingen Working Paper, [Available at]
Batista, R., N. Saibo, T. Lourenco, and M. Oliveira (2008), ‘Microarray analyses
reveal that plant mutagenesis may induce more transcriptomic changes than
transgene insertion’, Proceedings of the National Academy of Science USA 105:
Baudo, M., R. Lyons, S. Powers, G. Pastori, K. Edwards, M. Holdsworth, and
P. Shewry (2006), ‘Transgenesis has less impact on the transcriptome of wheat
grain than conventional breeding’, Plant Biotechnology Journal 4: 369–380.
Bennett, A.B., C. Chi-Ham, G. Barrows, S. Sexton, and D. Zilberman (2013), ‘Agri-
cultural biotechnology: economics, environment, ethics, and the future’, Annual
Review of Environment and Resources 38: 19.1–19.31.
Billingsley, P. (2012), Probability and Measure, Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley.
Case, A. and C. Paxson (2006), ‘Stature and status: height, ability, and labor market
outcomes’, Journal of Political Economy 116: 499–532.
Committee on Agriculture (2012), Cultivation of Genetically Modified Food Crops –
Prospects and Effects, New Delhi: Lok Sabha Secretariat.
Copenhagen Consensus (2008), Copenhagen Consensus 2008, [Available at] http://
Copenhagen Consensus (2012), Copenhagen Consensus 2012, [Available at] http://
Currie, J. and R. Hyson (1999), ‘Is the impact of health shocks cushioned by
socioeconomic status? The case of low birth weight’, American Economic Review
89: 245–250.
Deaton, A. (2003), ‘Health, inequality, and economic development’, Journal of Eco-
nomic Literature 41: 113–158.
Dixit, A. and R. Pindyck (1994), Investment Under Uncertainty, Princeton, NJ: Prince-
ton University Press.
Doblhammer, G. and J. Vaupel (2001), ‘Lifespan depends on month of birth’,
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences USA 98: 2934–2939.
Enserink, M. (2008), ‘Tough lessons from Golden Rice’, Science 320: 468–471.
Fogel, R.W. (1994), ‘Economic growth, population theory and physiology: the bear-
ing of long-term processes on the making of economic policy’, American Economic
Review 84: 369–395.
Graff, G., G. Hochman, and D. Zilberman (2009), ‘The political economy of agricul-
tural biotechnology policies’, AgBioForum 12: 34–46.
Graff, G., G. Hochman, and D. Zilberman (2013), ‘The political economy of tech-
nological regulation in the face of creative destruction: the case of agricultural
biotechnology’, in R. Herring (ed.), Oxford Handbook on Food, Politics and Society,
Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Greenpeace (2005), Golden Rice: All Glitter, No Gold, Amsterdam: Greenpeace Inter-
Greenpeace (2012), Golden Illusion: The Broken Promises of ‘Golden’ Rice, Amsterdam:
Greenpeace International.
18 Justus Wesseler and David Zilberman
Hennessy, D. and G. Moschini (2006), ‘Regulatory actions under adjustment costs
and the resolution of scientific uncertainty’, American Journal of Agricultural
Economics 88: 308–323.
Herman, R., B. Chassy, and W. Parrott (2009), ‘Compositional assessment of trans-
genic crops: an idea whose time has passed’, Trends in Biotechnology 27: 555–557.
Herring, R. (2007), ‘Opposition to transgenic technologies: ideology, interests and
collective action frames’, Nature Review Genetics 9: 458–463.
Herring, R. (2010), ‘Epistemic brokerage in the bio-property narrative: contribu-
tions to explaining opposition to transgenic technologies in agriculture’, New
Biotechnology 27: 614–622.
Herring, R. (2012), ‘State science and its discontents: why India’s second transgenic
crop did not follow the path of Bt cotton’, paper presented at the Weihenstephaner
Socio-Economic Seminar, Center of Life and Food Sciences Weihenstephan, Tech-
nische Universit¨
at M ¨
unchen, 13 June.
King, C.H. and A.M. Bertino (2008), ‘Asymmetries of poverty: why global burden of
disease valuations underestimate the burden of neglected tropical diseases’, PLoS
Neglected Tropical Diseases 2: e209.
Kolstad, C. (1987), ‘Uniformity versus differentiation in regulating externalities’,
Journal of Environmental Economics and Management 14: 386–399.
Murray, C. and A. Lopez (1996), The Global Burden of Disease,Vol.1,Cambridge,MA:
Harvard University Press.
Paarlberg, R. (2008), Starved for Science: How Biotechnology is Being Kept Out of Africa,
Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Potrykus, I. (2010a), ‘Regulation must be revolutionized’, Nature 466: 561.
Potrykus, I. (2010b), ‘Lessons from the “Humanitarian Golden Rice” project: regula-
tion prevents development of public good genetically engineered crop products’,
New Biotechnology 27: 466–472.
Qaim, M., A. Stein, and J.V. Meenakshi (2007), ‘Economics of biofortification’,
Agricultural Economics 37(s1): 119–133.
Ramessar, K., A. Peremarti, S. Gomez-Galera, S. Naqvi, M. Moralejo, P. Munoz,
T. Capell, and P. Chritou (2007), ‘Biosafety and risk assessment framework for
selectable marker genes in transgenic crop plants: a case of the science not
supporting the politics’, Transgenic Research 16: 261–280.
Richards, M., R. Hardy, D. Kuh, and M. Wadsworth (2002), ‘Birth weight, postnatal
growth and cognitive function in a national UK birth cohort’, International Journal
of Epidemiology 31: 342–348.
Shewry, P., M. Baudo, A. Lovegrove, and S. Powers (2007), ‘Are GM and conven-
tionally bred cereals really different?’, Trends in Food Sciences and Technology 18:
Stein, A. (2006), Micronutrient Malnutrition and the Impact of Modern Plant Breeding
on Public Health in India: How Cost-effective is Biofortification?,G
ottingen: Cuvillier
Verla g .
Stein, A., H. Sachdev, and M. Qaim (2008), ‘Genetic engineering for the poor: Golden
Rice and public health in India’, World Development 36: 144–158.
Swinnen, J.F.M. and T. Vandemoortele (2010), ‘Policy gridlock or future change?
The political economy dynamics of EU biotechnology regulation’, AgBioForum 13:
Tang, G., J. Qin, G. Dolnikoawski, R. Russell, and M. Grusak (2009), ‘Golden Rice
is an effective source of vitamin A’, American Journal of Clinical Nutrition 89:
Tang, G., Y. Hu, S. Yin, Y. Wang, G. Dallal, M. Grusak, and R. Russell (2012),
β-Carotene in Golden Rice is as good as β-carotene in oil at providing vitamin
A to children’, American Journal of Clinical Nutrition 96: 658–664.
Environment and Development Economics 19
Taylor, H. and S. Karlin (1984), An Introduction to Stochastic Modeling, Orlando, FL:
Academic Press.
Thomas, D. and E. Frankenberg (2002), ‘Health, nutrition and prosperity: a microe-
conomic perspective’, Bulletin of the World Health Organization 80: 106–113.
van den Belt, H. (2003), ‘Debating the precautionary principle: “guilty until proven
innocent” or “innocent until proven guilty”?’, Plant Physiology 132: 1122–1126.
Vigani, M. and A. Olper (2014), ‘GM-free private standards, public regulation of GM
products and mass media’, Environment and Development Economics, this issue.
Wesseler, J. (2009), ‘The Santaniello theorem of irreversible benefits’, AgBioForum 12:
Wesseler, J., S. Scatasta, and E. Fall (2011), ‘Environmental benefits and costs of GM
crops’, in C. Carter, G.C. Moschini, and I. Sheldon (eds), Genetically Modified Food
and Global Welfare, Bingley: Emerald Group Publishing, pp. 173–199.
Wesseler, J., S. Leimgruber, and R. Smart (2012), ‘Comparison of time periods in
the approval processes for GM crops in the EU, USA, Canada & South Africa’,
Paper presented at the 16th ICABR Conference, 128th EAAE Seminar, Ravello,
Italy, 24–27 June.
West, K. and I. Darnton-Hill (2008), ‘Vitamin A deficiency’, in R.D. Semba and M.W.
Bloem (eds), Nutrition and Health in Developing Countries, Totowa, NJ: Humana
Press, pp. 377–433.
World Health Organization (2001), Macroeconomics and Health: Investing in Health
for Economic Development. Report of the Commission on Macroeconomics and Health,
Geneva: World Health Organization.
Zimmermann, R. and M. Qaim (2004), ‘Potential health benefits of Golden Rice: a
Philippine case study’, Food Policy 29: 147–168.
... Levels of pro-vitamin A in rice (Oryza sativa) can be deficient and result in blindness and reduced life expectancy in regions where rice is a significant part of the diet. 235 Over two decades ago it was shown that rice could be genetically modified to elevate the expression of pro-vitamin A. [236][237][238][239][240] This genetic modification became commonly known as Golden Rice. Initially criticism was that while elevated the levels pro-vitamin A being expressed were still too low to make a real difference. ...
Full-text available
Innovation in agriculture has been essential in improving productivity of crops and forages to support a growing population, improving living standards while contributing toward maintaining environment integrity, human health, and wellbeing through provision of more nutritious, varied, and abundant food sources. A crucial part of that innovation has involved a range of techniques for both expanding and exploiting the genetic potential of plants. However, some techniques used for generating new variation for plant breeders to exploit are deemed higher risk than others despite end products of both processes at times being for all intents and purposes identical for the benefits they provide. As a result, public concerns often triggered by poor communication from innovators, resulting in mistrust and suspicion has, in turn, caused the development of a range of regulatory systems. The logic and motivations for modes of regulation used are reviewed and how the benefits from use of these technologies can be delivered more efficiently and effectively is discussed. ARTICLE HISTORY
... The strategy of transgenic biofortification aims to increase the micronutrient content of crops by inserting genes from other species to produce transgenic crops, when natural variation in sexually compatible germplasm is insufficient to achieve satisfactory micronutrient levels 19,20 . Although transgenic biofortified crops involve significant development and regulatory costs, they are cost-effective in the long run compared to conventional or complementary approaches 21 . ...
Full-text available
Hidden hunger is a form of malnutrition, afflicting one-third of the world's population. It is caused due to the lack of micronutrients, mainly iron, zinc and vitamin A, in the human diet and can lead to mental impairment, poor health, low productivity and even death. It is common in many developing and developed countries. A change in research focus from increased agricultural production of calorie-rich staple crops to nutrient-dense staple crops is crucial to address the above problem. Biofortification is a process of increasing the density of vitamins and minerals in a crop through plant breeding, transgenic or recombinant DNA technology or agrono-mic practices. Biofortification through breeding has been taken up as a challenge by HarvestPlus for cassava and sweet potato, which has resulted in the release of many biofortified varieties that could fight hidden hunger and ensure food security in many Sub-Saharan African countries. The BioCassavaPlus project adopted transgen-ic strategies for biofortification in cassava. Transgenic approaches serve as an alternative for biofortification in sweet potatoes. HarvestPlus has not included yam in its biofortification programme, though increasing the provitamin A carotenoid content of yam is much needed. Bioavailability of micronutrients has been thoroughly studied in sweet potatoes. In India, the ICAR-Central Tuber Crop Research Institute (CTCRI), Thiruvanan-thapuram has been involved in the biofortification of tropical tuber crops and has released many biofortified varieties in sweet potato, cassava and yam. In a collabo-rative work plan with CIP, ICAR-CTCRI is at present involved in the development of biofortified varieties of sweet potato. The need to release and adopt transgenic biofortified crops is discussed here, as sweet potato is a naturally transgenic crop.
... In many instances, improving macro-nutrients (proteins, carbohydrates, lipids, fiber) and micro-nutrients (vitamins, minerals, functional metabolites) has significant childhood health improvements, such as reducing blindness due to the lack of vitamin availability. Improved food nutrient content, especially the increase in mineral availability, contributes to improved immunity systems and reduces stunting [40]. In many developing countries, plant-based nutrient intake accounts for 100% of an individual's nutrient diet, further highlighting the importance of nutritionally enhanced crop-derived foods. ...
Full-text available
While the global number of people experiencing food insecurity remains stubbornly high, innovations have been increasingly adopted that are contributing to ensure that food systems are as resilient and flexible as they can possibly be. Bioeconomy and biotechnology innovations have contributed to improving rural development and food production. Genomic knowledge is an important part of innovative bioeconomy and biotechnology research as it is applied to increase the efficiency of crops, animals, biofuel, bioplastics and bioenergy production. This allows food systems to transform to be more sustainable and equitable, providing healthy, nutritious food, while creating livelihood opportunities and reducing negative impacts. This article highlights the beneficial impacts of innovative bioeconomy and biotechnology products in technologies, particularly as they relate to the Americas.
... These results confirm the high cost of regulatory delay (Wesseler & Zilberman, 2014;Wesseler et al., 2017). Using the Silver Bullet scenario as the benchmark, Figure 2 presents the aggregate discounted consumer and producer surpluses by risk category over the study horizon. ...
Full-text available
We assess the economic welfare implications of developing and introducing a gene‐edited banana with resistance against an emerging plant disease, Fusarium oxysporum f.sp. cubense Tropical race 4, on global banana production. Using a model incorporating disease dynamics and diffusion of a technological solution, we find that a 5‐year delay in adoption results in discounted losses of $94 billion. Consumers always lose from delay, while the impact on producers depends on timing and severity of the disease. The results suggest that regulatory delay significantly decreases return on investment from research, and acceptance of a technological solution may depend on the distribution of benefits and costs across stakeholders.
... In many instances, improving macro-nutrients (e.g., proteins, carbohydrates, lipids, fiber) and micro-nutrients (e.g., vitamins, minerals, functional metabolites) results in significant childhood health improvements, such as reducing blindness due to the lack of vitamin availability (Wesseler and Zilberman 2014;Dubock 2014). Improved food nutrient content, especially the increase in mineral availability, contributes to improved immunity systems and reduces stunting . ...
Full-text available
This chapter identifies opportunities around bioeconomic concepts for the transformation of food systems. Bioeconomy is a multi-dimensional concept and blends well with the food systems concept. Its goals include the reduction of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions; the efficient use of energy and material; responsible consumption; and social inclusion through innovation, with a focus on the transformation of the structure of production. Bioeconomy makes important contributions to sustainable economic growth from the environmental and social points of view, offering direct jobs and employment and higher value addition. Bioeconomy offers support for the transformation of food systems by increasing crop and livestock yields through sustainable intensification activities. It can strengthen local value chains, promoting the reuse and recycling of food resources. These strategies at the local level contribute to poverty reduction through the creation of new rural jobs. Food system resilience can be strengthened based on the diversification of agricultural commodity production, the increased use of bio-based inputs in agriculture and the diversification of rural incomes through the rural production of bioenergy, bio-based industry and environmental services. Bioeconomy can be effectively used for the upscaling of biotechnology innovations, improved environmental sustainability and climate resilience, and improved nutrition and health. Links between the bioeconomy and the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development are demonstrated by using the indicators of the United Nation’s Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) for monitoring and evaluating the bioeconomy.
Full-text available
Climate change is having a significant impact on the global grape and wine sector. We are seeing earlier and more compressed vintages, more extreme weather events, and a warming of temperatures. These are all leading to management changes in both the vineyard and the winery. Overlaying these physical changes are the mega-consumer trends that are demanding more sustainable production patterns. These trends are changing consumer attitudes to many previously held beliefs. Solutions with a trend toward a sustainable and agrochemical-free agriculture and production chain are needed. Technological advances in plant genetic engineering, coupled with the sequencing of the grapevine genome, has enabled new techniques that can rapidly be used to enhance positive characters in grape vines and wine. Changing consumer attitudes have led to a number of regulators reviewing their existing food regulations for genetically modified (GM) food. The debate around the definitions for GM food and whether these are fit for purpose since the emergence of a range of new techniques for genetic modification has the potential to dramatically change the landscape for grape and wine production internationally. In this paper we explore the current regulatory developments, consumer trends and attitudes and the implications for the grape and wine sector as we seek to cope with the demands of climate change and provide a sustainable future for the planet.
Advances in molecular biology and biotechnology are increasing at a rapid pace, both in the development of new methodologies and in their practical applications. This popular textbook has been revised and updated to provide an overview of this exciting area of bioscience and to reflect a number of the key developments driving this expansion. Chapters on the basic methods of key technologies such as nucleic acid analysis and bioinformatics are presented, in addition to genomics and proteomics, which highlight the impact of molecular biology and biotechnology. New chapters on important and emerging methods have been introduced such as gene editing, next generation sequencing, nanobiotechnology and molecular modelling. The first six chapters deal with the core technology used in current molecular biology and biotechnology. These primarily deal with basic molecular biology methods such as PCR, cloning genes and genomes, protein analysis techniques and recombinant protein production. Later chapters address major advances in the applications of specialist areas of molecular biotechnology. Experienced lecturers and researchers have written each chapter and the information is presented in an easily assimilated form. This book makes an ideal text for undergraduates studying these areas and will be of particular interest to students in many areas of biosciences, biology and chemistry. In addition, it will appeal to postgraduates and other scientific workers who need a sound introduction to this ever rapidly advancing and expanding area.
Full-text available
Buku ini merupakan pengantar untuk mata kuliah bioteknologi, khususnya aplikasi bioteknologi di bidang pertanian (pangan). Isi buku terdiri dari: pendahuluan, perkembangan bidang rekayasa genetika, genetically modified foods, konsep dasar bioteknologi molekular, aplikasi DNA rekombinan, dan penutup.
Full-text available
This chapter looks at food system innovations and digital technologies as important drivers of productivity growth and improved food and nutrition security. The analysis emphasizes a mix of research feasibility and technology-enabling policy factors necessary to realize pro-poor benefits. Given their transformative potential and the urgency of developing the enabling R&D and policy trajectories required for impact, we highlight genome editing bio-innovations, specifically CRISPR-Cas9, to address sustainable agricultural growth; and digital technologies, including remote sensing, connected sensors, artificial intelligence, digital advisory services, digital financial services, and e-commerce, to help guide the operations and decision-making of farmers, traders, and policymakers in agricultural value chains. The analysis points to the need to close critical gaps in R&D investments, capabilities, and enabling policies and regulations to accelerate the scaling and adoption of innovations. At the global level, the engagement of low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) with global players should be facilitated to strengthen intellectual property (IP) access and the management of innovations; and North–South, South–South, and triangular cooperation should be promoted to strengthen LMICs’ regulatory capabilities. At the national level, countries need to invest in science-based participatory approaches to identify and adapt technologies to local conditions ; close regulatory gaps through evidence-based frameworks that enable the rapid development, deployment, and safe use of innovations; close institutional and human capacity gaps by addressing limitations in institutional capacities and coordination, while training a new generation of scientists with the skills needed to develop and deliver innovations; develop an understanding of political economy factors for a nuanced knowledge of actors’ agendas to better inform communications and address technology hesitancy; close digital infrastructure gaps in rural areas by promoting simultaneous investments in digital infrastructure and electrification, reducing data costs, and improving digital literacy; and develop sustainable business models for digital service providers to help them achieve profitability, interoperability, and scale to reach a sustainable critical mass, and thus facilitate the adoption of food system innovations.
Full-text available
Agricultural biotechnology and, specifically, the development of genetically modified (GM) crops have been controversial for several reasons, including concerns that the technology poses potential negative environmental or health effects, that the technology would lead to the (further) corporatization of agriculture, and that it is simply unethical to manipulate life in the laboratory. GM crops have been part of the agricultural landscape for more than 15 years and have now been adopted on more than 170 million hectares (ha) in both developed countries (48%) and developing countries (52%). On the basis of this substantial history and data spanning many years, the economic and environmental impacts of GM crops can now be summarized with some certainty, and the analysis indicates that, on balance, many benefits have accrued from the adoption of GM crops. There continue to be many ethical issues that are being debated, and many are being resolved through institutional interventions. The future of agricultural productivity would be better served if the genetic modification debate were less polarized and were focused on the potential for complementarity of GM technologies within a diversified farming system framework.
Background Birthweight is associated with cognition and educational attainment across the full birthweight range in the normal population, independently of social background. However, the extent to which birthweight reflects fetal growth, or is a marker of subsequent size, with respect to this association, is not clear. We therefore investigated the independent effects of birthweight and postnatal height adjusted for postnatal weight on cognitive function and educational attainment while controlling for family background. Methods Using the British 1946 birth cohort we investigated the association between cognitive function at various ages and birthweight, height adjusted for weight in childhood and adulthood, and educational attainment, controlling for sex, father's social class, maternal education, birth order, and maternal age. Results Birthweight was positively associated with cognition up to age 26, and with the likelihood of obtaining advanced educational qualifications. Height was positively associated with cognition at all ages, and also with educational attainment. Weight was not associated with cognition at ages 8 and 15, but was negatively associated with verbal ability at age 26, with verbal memory at age 43, and with educational attainment. These effects were independent of each other, and of family background. Conditional analyses suggested the positive effect of height growth on cognition at two intervals, one in early childhood, and the other in late adolescence. In addition, weight gain after age 15 was negatively associated with cognition at 26. Conclusion Birthweight and postnatal growth are independently associated with cognition.
There are major differences in biotechnology regulation among various countries and in particular between the European Union and the United States. We summarize a formal and dynamic model of government decision-making on technology regulation, which shows that minor differences in consumer preferences can lead to important differences in regulation and that temporary shocks to preferences can have long-lasting effects. We argue that this model may contribute to explain the difference between EU and US biotechnology regulation. We discuss the European Union's current authorization procedure of GMOs and illustrate its regulatory gridlock. We describe some institutional reforms that are being proposed and undertaken at the EU level to overcome this policy gridlock.
This paper provides evidence on private standards on genetically modified (GM) organisms for 44 retailers operating in 54 countries, distinguishing between retailers not using GM ingredients, and retailers using ingredients which are potentially GM in private label products. Using this information, we empirically investigate the drivers that induce retailers to adopting a GM-free private standard. The results show that many of the drivers highlighted in the literature, such as historical factors, communication infrastructure and sectoral conditions affect the likelihood of adopting a private standard. Moreover, we tested additional hypotheses from the political economy of standard formation and of mass media. Key results show that a higher share of public media reduces the probability of adopting GM-free private standards, while a higher heterogeneity in the GMO public standards increase this probability.
Probability. Measure. Integration. Random Variables and Expected Values. Convergence of Distributions. Derivatives and Conditional Probability. Stochastic Processes. Appendix. Notes on the Problems. Bibliography. List of Symbols. Index.