Suchergebnisse

AbstractNew plant breeding technologies (NPBTs), including genetically modified and gene‐edited crops, offer large potentials for sustainable agricultural development and food security while addressing shortcomings of the Green Revolution. This article reviews potentials, risks, and actually observed impacts of NPBTs. Regulatory aspects are also discussed. While the science is exciting and some clear benefits are already observable, overregulation and public misperceptions may obstruct efficient development and use of NPBTs. Overregulation is particularly observed in Europe, but also affects developing countries in Africa and Asia, which could benefit the most from NPBTs. Regulatory reforms and a more science‐based public debate are required.

"Wie viel mehr an Nahrungsmitteln brauchen wir und wie kann diese Mehrproduktion erreicht werden, um alle satt zu machen? Welcher Technologien bedarf es dafür? Wie entwickeln sich Angebots- und Nachfragetrends, nicht zuletzt durch die steigende Bedeutung von Bioenergie? Der Autor diskutiert diese Fragen und verweist auf die Rolle der Landwirtschaft für die Reduzierung der Armut von Kleinbauern in Entwicklungsländern." (Autorenreferat)

AbstractThe study analyzes ex ante the socioeconomic effects of transgenic virus resistance technology for potatoes in Mexico. All groups of potato growers could significantly gain from the transgenic varieties to be introduced, and the technology could even improve income distribution. Nonetheless, public support is needed to fully harness this potential. Different policy alternatives are tested within scenario calculations in order to supply information on how to optimize the technological outcome, both from an efficiency and an equity perspective. Transgenic disease resistance is a promising technology for developing countries. Providing these countries with better access to biotechnology should be given higher political priority.

Contractual agreements between smallholder farmers and agribusiness companies have gained in importance in many developing countries. While productivity and income effects of contracting in the small farm sector were analyzed in many previous studies, labor market and employment effects are not yet well understood. This is an important research gap, especially against the background of continued population growth and structural transformation. Here, we investigate the effects of two types of contractual agreements between large international processing companies and smallholder farmers on agricultural labor use, household labor allocation, and hired labor demand in Ghana's palm oil sector. We use cross‐sectional survey data and a willingness-to-pay approach to control for unobserved heterogeneity between farmers with and without contracts. We find that agricultural labor intensity is substantially reduced through the contracts, because contracting in Ghana is associated with the adoption of labor‐saving procedures and technologies. Simple marketing contracts lead to reallocation of the saved household labor to off‐farm employment, whereas resource‐providing contracts lead to a stronger reallocation of labor within the farming enterprise. Household labor is more affected by labor savings than hired labor.

Smallholder farmers in developing countries often suffer from high risk and limited market access. Contract farming may improve the situation under certain conditions. Several studies analyzed effects of contracts on smallholder productivity and income with mixed results. Most existing studies focused on one particular contract scheme. Contract characteristics rarely differ within one scheme, so little is known about how different contract characteristics may influence the benefits for smallholders. Here, we address this research gap using data from oil palm farmers in Ghana who participate in different contract schemes. Some of the farmers have simple marketing contracts, while others have resource-providing contracts where the buyer also offers inputs and technical services on credit. A comparison group cultivates oil palm without any contract. Regression models that control for selection bias show that resource-providing contracts increase farmers' input use and yield. Resource-providing contracts also incentivize higher levels of specialization and an increase in the scale of production. These effects are especially pronounced for small and medium-sized farms. In contrast, the marketing contracts have no significant effects on input use, productivity, and scale of production. The results suggest that resource-providing contracts alleviate market access constraints, while simple marketing contracts do not in this context.