GMOs and global food security

• Autorzy: Przezborska-Skrobiej L. , Sieminski P.

Warianty tytułu

PL

GMO a świtowe bezpieczeństwo żywności

• Języki publikacji: EN

Abstrakty

EN

The main aim of the paper was an analysis of the present status and changes of commercially grown genetically modified crops and food security from 2012 to 2018, based on the Global Food Security Index by countries. The work used a descriptive approach with elements of inductive reasoning and meta-analysis based on secondary data, derived from Briefs of The International Service for the Acquisition of Agri-biotech Applications, FAOSTAT and the GFSI, developed and calculated by The Economist Intelligence Unit. The study showed the highest increase in biotech crops was observed in Brazil and the USA, i.e. in countries with a relatively high level of GFSI. Accordingly, the highest positive change in GFSI was achieved in several countries both with quite a high level of GFSI (Chile, Uruguay and Argentina) and with a very low GFSI (Burkina Faso and Myanmar). A slightly positive Pearson correlation coefficient for the area of biotech crops and GFSI indicated that, in the analysed period, when an increase in GM crop area was observed, the value of the GFSI increased as well. However, the value of the Pearson correlation means that the biotech crop area can be considered one of the many factors influencing the food security of the studied countries. The results show that biotech crops cannot only be analysed in the context of food security at a country level, but also at a household level. GM crops could contribute to food production increases and higher food availability, however not necessarily to food security, especially at a country level.

PL

Głównym celem pracy jest analiza obecnego stanu i zmian w uprawach biotechnologicznych oraz bezpieczeństwa żywnościowego na podstawie Globalnego Indeksu Bezpieczeństwa Żywności (GFSI), według krajów. W pracy zastosowano podejście opisowe z elementami wnioskowania indukcyjnego i metaanalizy opartej na danych wtórnych, pochodzących z publikacji Międzynarodowego Instytutu Propagowania Upraw Biotechnologicznych (ISAAA), FAOSTAT i Globalnego Indeksu Bezpieczeństwa Żywnościowego (GFSI), opracowanego i obliczanego przez The Economist Intelligence Unit (the EIU). Badanie wykazało, że w latach 2012-2018 najwiekszy wzrost powierzchni upraw genetycznie modyfikowanych zaobserwowano w Brazylii i USA, tj. w krajach o stosunkowo wysokim poziomie GFSI, a najwyższą pozytywną zmianę GFSI w kilku krajach, zarówno z wysokim poziomem GFSI (Chile, Urugwaj i Argentyna), jak i z bardzo niskim GFSI (Burkina Faso i Myanmar). Nieznacznie dodatni współczynnik korelacji Pearsona dla obszaru upraw biotechnologicznych i GFSI wskazuje, że w analizowanym okresie, wraz ze wzrostem powierzchni upraw GM, wartość GFSI na ogół także zwiększała się. Uprawa roślin genetycznie modyfikowanych może być więc uważana za jeden z wielu czynników wpływających na bezpieczeństwo żywnościowe badanych krajów.

• Wydawca: -
• Czasopismo: Annals of the Polish Association of Agricultural and Agrobusiness Economists
• Rocznik: 2020
• Tom: 22
• Numer: 2
• Opis fizyczny: p.173-182,ref.

Twórcy

autor

Przezborska-Skrobiej L.

• Department of Economics and Economic Policy in Agribusiness, Poznan University of Life Sciences, 28 Wojska Polskiego St., 60-637 Poznan, Poland

autor

Sieminski P.

• Department of Economics and Economic Policy in Agribusiness, Poznan University of Life Sciences, 28 Wojska Polskiego St., 60-637 Poznan, Poland

Bibliografia

• Brookes Graham, Peter Barfoot. 2008. Global impact of biotech crops: Socio-economic and environmental effects, 1996-2006. AgBioForum 11: 21-38.
• Beardmore John A., Joanne S. Porter. 2003. Genetically modified organisms (GMOs) and aquaculture. Communications in Agricultural and Applied Biological Sciences 68 (2 Pt B): 585-610.
• De Visser Cornelis Leonardus Maria, Remco Schreuder, Frederick Stoddard. 2014. The EU’s dependency on soya bean import for the animal feed industry and potential for EU produced alternatives. Oilseeds & fats Crops and Lipids 21 (4): D407. DOI:10.1051/ocl/2014021.
• Dibden Jacqui, Gibbs David, Cocklin Chris. 2013. Framing GM crops as a food security solution. Journal of Rural Studies 29: 59-70. DOI:10.1016/j.jrurstud.2011.11.001.
• EC (European Commission). 2019. United States is Europe’s main soya beans supplier with imports up by 112%, https://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_IP-19-161_en.htm, access: 15.09.2019.
• FAO. 1996. Rome Declaration on Food Security and World Food Summit Plan of Action, http://www.fao.org/3/w3613e/w3613e00.htm, access: 14.09.2019.
• ISAAA. 2014. Agricultural Biotechnology (A Lot More than Just GM Crops). Ithaca, New York: ISAAA.
• ISAAA. 2015. 50 Biotech bites. Ithaca, New York: ISAAA.
• ISAAA. 2017. 22 Years of biotech crops in the world. Ithaca, New York: ISAAA.
• ISAAA. 2018. Biotech crops continue to help meet the challenges of increased population and climate change. Brief No. 54. Ithaca. Ithaca, New York: ISAAA.
• ISAAA. 2019. Donor Support Groups. Ithaca, New York: https://isaaa.org/inbrief/donors/default. asp, access: 12.12.2019.
• James Clive. 2012. Global Status of Commercialized Biotech/GM Crops: 2012. Brief No. 44. Ithaca. New York: ISAAA.
• James Clive. 2013. Global Status of Commercialized Biotech/GM Crops: 2013. Brief No. 46. Ithaca. New York: ISAAA.
• James Clive. 2014. Global Status of Commercialized Biotech/GM Crops: 2014. Brief No. 49. Ithaca. New York: ISAAA.
• James, Clive. 2015. 20th anniversary of the global commercialization of biotech crops (1996 to 2015) and biotech crop highlights in 2015. ISAAA Brief No. 51. Ithaca. New York: ISAAA.
• James Clive. 2016. Global status of commercialized Biotech/GM crops: 2016. Brief No. 52. Ithaca. New York: ISAAA.
• James Clive. 2017. Global status of commercialized Biotech/GM crops in 2017: Biotech crop adoption surges as economic benefits accumulate in 22 years. Brief No. 53. ISAAA: Ithaca, NY.
• James Clive. 2018. Biotech Crops Continue to Help Meet the Challenges of Increased Population and Climate Change, Ex. Summary. Brief 54. Ithaca, New York: ISAAA.
• Qaim Matin, Shahzad Khouser. 2013. Genetically Modified crops and food security. PLoS ONE 8 (6): e64879. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0064879.
• Raman Ruchir. 2017. The impact of Genetically Modified (GM) crops in modern agriculture: A review. GM Crops & Food. Biotechnology in Agriculture and the Food Chain 8 (4): 195-218. DOI: 10.1080/21645698.2017.1413522.
• Ronald Pamela. 2011. Plant genetics, sustainable agriculture and global food security. Genetics 188: 11-20. DOI: 10.1534/genetics.111.128553.
• Sendashonga Cyrie, Rya Hill, Antonio Petrini. 2005. The Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety: Interaction between the convention on biological diversity and the world organisation for animal health. Revue Scientifique et Technique (International Office Of Epizootics) 24 (1): 19-30.
• The Economist. Intelligence Unit. 2018. GFSI 2018. A report from The Economist Intelligence Unit. Building resilience in the Face of Rising Food-Security Risks, https://foodsecurityindex.eiu.com/, access: 30.09.2019.
• Trivedi Mala, Singh Rachana, Shukla Manish, Tiwari Rajesh K. 2016. GMO and Food Security. [In] Ecofriendly Pest Management for Food Security, 703-726. Academic Press. DOI: 10.1016/B978-0-12-803265-7.00023-3.
• WHO. 2015. Food safety. Frequently asked questions on genetically modified foods, https://www.who.int/foodsafety/areas_work/food-technology/faq-genetically-modified-food/en/, access: 15.09.2019.

Identyfikatory

DOI

10.5604/01.3001.0013.8980