IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v13y2021i21p11679-d662275.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Correlating Genetically Modified Crops, Glyphosate Use and Increased Carbon Sequestration

Author

Listed:
  • Chelsea Sutherland

    (Department of Agricultural and Resource Economics, University of Saskatchewan, Saskatoon, SK S7N 5A8, Canada)

  • Savannah Gleim

    (Department of Agricultural and Resource Economics, University of Saskatchewan, Saskatoon, SK S7N 5A8, Canada)

  • Stuart J. Smyth

    (Department of Agricultural and Resource Economics, University of Saskatchewan, Saskatoon, SK S7N 5A8, Canada)

Abstract

In the early 1990s, tillage was the leading form of weed control, with minimum/zero-tillage management practices incapable of long-term continuation. Presently, weed control through tillage has virtually disappeared as cropland management systems have transitioned largely to continuous cropping, with zero to minimal soil disturbance. Research was undertaken to examine what was driving this land management transition. A carbon accounting framework incorporating coefficients derived from the Century Model was used to estimate carbon sequestration in the Canadian province of Saskatchewan. The results quantify the transition from farmland being a net carbon emitter to being a net carbon sequesterer over the past 30 years. This evidence confirms the correlation between genetically modified, herbicide-tolerant crops and glyphosate use is a driver of the increased soil carbon sequestration. The removal of tillage and adoption of minimal soil disturbances has reduced the amount of carbon released from tillage and increased the sequestration of carbon through continuous crop production. Countries that ban genetically modified crops and are enacting legislation restricting glyphosate use are implementing policies that Canadian farm evidence indicates will not contribute to increasing agricultural sustainability.

Suggested Citation

  • Chelsea Sutherland & Savannah Gleim & Stuart J. Smyth, 2021. "Correlating Genetically Modified Crops, Glyphosate Use and Increased Carbon Sequestration," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(21), pages 1-15, October.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:13:y:2021:i:21:p:11679-:d:662275
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/13/21/11679/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/13/21/11679/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Edward D. Perry & GianCarlo Moschini & David A. Hennessy, 2016. "Testing for Complementarity: Glyphosate Tolerant Soybeans and Conservation Tillage," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 98(3), pages 765-784.
    2. MacWilliam, Susan & Sanscartier, David & Lemke, Reynald & Wismer, Monique & Baron, Vern, 2016. "Environmental benefits of canola production in 2010 compared to 1990: A life cycle perspective," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 145(C), pages 106-115.
    3. Smyth, Stuart J. & Gusta, Michael & Belcher, Kenneth & Phillips, Peter W.B. & Castle, David, 2011. "Environmental impacts from herbicide tolerant canola production in Western Canada," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 104(5), pages 403-410, June.
    4. Geoffrey Barrows & Steven Sexton & David Zilberman, 2014. "Agricultural Biotechnology: The Promise and Prospects of Genetically Modified Crops," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 28(1), pages 99-120, Winter.
    5. Shrestha, Bharat M. & Desjardins, Raymond L. & McConkey, Brian G. & Worth, Devon E. & Dyer, James A. & Cerkowniak, Darrel D., 2014. "Change in carbon footprint of canola production in the Canadian Prairies from 1986 to 2006," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 63(C), pages 634-641.
    6. Kelly A. Davey & W. Hartley Furtan, 2008. "Factors That Affect the Adoption Decision of Conservation Tillage in the Prairie Region of Canada," Canadian Journal of Agricultural Economics/Revue canadienne d'agroeconomie, Canadian Agricultural Economics Society/Societe canadienne d'agroeconomie, vol. 56(3), pages 257-275, September.
    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. Houman Hashemzadeh & Alireza Karbasi & Hosein Mohammadi & Ali Firoozzare & Flavio Boccia, 2022. "Investigating the Effect of Nudges on Consumers’ Willingness to Pay for Genetically Modified Corn Oil," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(19), pages 1-18, October.
    2. Clarisse Mendoza Gonzalvo & Wilson Jr. Florendo Aala & Keshav Lall Maharjan, 2022. "Is Implementing a Biotech Ban Correct or Not? Analysis of Farmer Perceptions and Attitudes on the Philippine Supreme Court’s Ban on Biotech Crops," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(13), pages 1-21, June.
    3. Eduardo Trigo & Hugo Chavarria & Carl Pray & Stuart J. Smyth & Agustin Torroba & Justus Wesseler & David Zilberman & Juan Martinez, 2023. "The Bioeconomy and Food Systems Transformation," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(7), pages 1-12, March.
    4. Paarlberg, Robert, 2022. "The trans-Atlantic conflict over “green” farming," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 108(C).
    5. Felicia Cheţan & Teodor Rusu & Cornel Cheţan & Camelia Urdă & Raluca Rezi & Alina Şimon & Ileana Bogdan, 2022. "Influence of Soil Tillage Systems on the Yield and Weeds Infestation in the Soybean Crop," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(10), pages 1-13, October.

    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. Federico Ciliberto & GianCarlo Moschini & Edward D. Perry, 2019. "Valuing product innovation: genetically engineered varieties in US corn and soybeans," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 50(3), pages 615-644, September.
    2. Scheitrum, Daniel & Schaefer, K. Aleks & Nes, Kjersti, 2020. "Realized and potential global production effects from genetic engineering," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 93(C).
    3. Claassen, Roger & Bowman, Maria & McFadden, Jonathan & Smith, David & Wallander, Steven, 2018. "Tillage Intensity and Conservation Cropping in the United States," Economic Information Bulletin 277566, United States Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service.
    4. Luo, Jinjing & Moschini, GianCarlo & Perry, Edward D., 2023. "Switching costs in the US seed industry: Technology adoption and welfare impacts," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 89(C).
    5. Steven Haggblade & Bart Minten & Carl Pray & Thomas Reardon & David Zilberman, 2017. "The Herbicide Revolution in Developing Countries: Patterns, Causes, and Implications," The European Journal of Development Research, Palgrave Macmillan;European Association of Development Research and Training Institutes (EADI), vol. 29(3), pages 533-559, July.
    6. Lee, Seungki & Moschini, GianCarlo & Perry, Edward D., 2023. "Genetically engineered varieties and applied pesticide toxicity in U.S. maize and soybeans: Heterogeneous and evolving impacts," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 211(C).
    7. Pelai, Ricardo & Hagerman, Shannon M. & Kozak, Robert, 2020. "Biotechnologies in agriculture and forestry: Governance insights from a comparative systematic review of barriers and recommendations," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 117(C).
    8. Vincent Smith & Justus H. H. Wesseler & David Zilberman, 2021. "New Plant Breeding Technologies: An Assessment of the Political Economy of the Regulatory Environment and Implications for Sustainability," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(7), pages 1-18, March.
    9. Wade, Tara & Kurkalova, Lyubov & Secchi, Silvia, 2016. "Modeling Field-Level Conservation Tillage Adoption with Aggregate Choice Data," Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Western Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 41(2), May.
    10. Devin Moeller & Heidi L. Sieverding & James J. Stone, 2017. "Comparative Farm-Gate Life Cycle Assessment of Oilseed Feedstocks in the Northern Great Plains," Biophysical Economics and Resource Quality, Springer, vol. 2(4), pages 1-16, December.
    11. Hana Urbancová & Pavla Vrabcová, 2020. "Age management as a human resources management strategy with a focus on the primary sector of the Czech Republic," Agricultural Economics, Czech Academy of Agricultural Sciences, vol. 66(6), pages 251-259.
    12. Julian M. Alston & Philip G. Pardey, 2020. "Innovation, Growth, and Structural Change in American Agriculture," NBER Chapters, in: The Role of Innovation and Entrepreneurship in Economic Growth, pages 123-165, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    13. L. Toma & A. P. Barnes & L.-A. Sutherland & S. Thomson & F. Burnett & K. Mathews, 2018. "Impact of information transfer on farmers’ uptake of innovative crop technologies: a structural equation model applied to survey data," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 43(4), pages 864-881, August.
    14. Lee, Yunkyung & Perrin, Richard K. & Fulginiti, Lilyan E., 2022. "Potential Economic Impacts of Gene-edited High-oleic Soybeans," 2022 Annual Meeting, July 31-August 2, Anaheim, California 322392, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    15. W. Mark Brown & Shon M. Ferguson & Crina Viju‐Miljusevic, 2020. "Farm Size, Technology Adoption and Agricultural Trade Reform: Evidence from Canada," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 71(3), pages 676-697, September.
    16. Deepayan Debnath & Madhu Khanna & Deepak Rajagopal & David Zilberman, 2019. "The Future of Biofuels in an Electrifying Global Transportation Sector: Imperative, Prospects and Challenges," Applied Economic Perspectives and Policy, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 41(4), pages 563-582, December.
    17. Meilin Ma & Jessie Lin & Richard J. Sexton, 2022. "The Transition from Small to Large Farms in Developing Economies: A Welfare Analysis," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 104(1), pages 111-133, January.
    18. Ingrida Lukošiutė, & Petrauskaitė-Senkevič, 2017. "Evaluation Of Lithuanian Consumers’ Attitudes To Genetically Modified Food," Journal of Agribusiness and Rural Development, University of Life Sciences, Poznan, Poland, vol. 43(1), March.
    19. Tamini, Lota D., 2011. "A nonparametric analysis of the impact of agri-environmental advisory activities on best management practice adoption: A case study of Québec," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(7), pages 1363-1374, May.
    20. Tina L. Saitone & Richard J. Sexton, 2017. "Agri-food supply chain: evolution and performance with conflicting consumer and societal demands," European Review of Agricultural Economics, Oxford University Press and the European Agricultural and Applied Economics Publications Foundation, vol. 44(4), pages 634-657.

    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:gam:jsusta:v:13:y:2021:i:21:p:11679-:d:662275. 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: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    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.