Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-fscjk Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-23T08:48:02.238Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Performance Results and Characteristics of Adopters of Genetically Engineered Soybeans in Delaware

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  15 September 2016

John C. Bernard ,
John D. Pesek Jr.  and
Chunbo Fan
John C. Bernard
Affiliation:
Department of Food and Resource Economics, the University of Delaware
John D. Pesek Jr.
Affiliation:
Department of Food and Resource Economics, the University of Delaware
Chunbo Fan
Affiliation:
Department of Food and Resource Economics, the University of Delaware
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Genetically engineered (GE) soybeans first became available to farmers in 1996. Despite the common questions regarding any new crop technology, the new seeds were rapidly adopted. This study examines the characteristics of adopters, as well as yield and weed control cost changes, using survey results from Delaware farmers at the start of the 2000 season. Duration analysis reveals that earlier-adopting farmers had larger farms and tended to use computers for financial management, while regression analysis shows significantly lower weed control costs and, to a lesser extent, higher yields for GE soybeans.

Keywords

GE soybeanstechnology adoption
Type
Articles
Information
Agricultural and Resource Economics Review , Volume 33 , Issue 2 , October 2004 , pp. 282 - 292
Copyright
Copyright © 2004 Northeastern Agricultural and Resource Economics Association 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Allison, P. D. (1995). Survival Analysis Using the SAS System: A Practical Guide. Cary, NC: SAS Institute, Inc. Google Scholar
Bernard, J. C., Pesek, J. D. Jr., and Fan, C. (2004) “Delaware Farmers’ Adoption of GE Soybeans in a Time of Uncertain U.S. Adoption.” Agribusiness: An International Journal 20(1), 81–94.Google Scholar
Bullock, D. S., and Nitsi, E. I. (2000). “Roundup-Ready Soybean Technology and Farm Production Costs.” American Behavioral Scientist 44(8), 1283–1301.Google Scholar
Burton, M., Rigby, D., and Young, T. (2003). “Modeling the Adoption of Organic Horticulture Technology in the UK Using Duration Analysis.” Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics 47(1), 29–54.Google Scholar
Carpenter, J., and Gianessi, L. (1999). “Herbicide-Tolerant Soybeans: Why Growers Are Adopting Roundup-Ready Varieties.” AgBioForum 2(2), 65–72.Google Scholar
Delannay, X., Bauman, T. T., Beighley, D. H., Buettner, M. J., Coble, H. D., DeFelice, M. S., Derting, C. W., Diedrick, T. J., Griffin, J. L., Hagood, E. S., Hancock, F. G., Hart, S. E., LaVallee, B. J., Loux, M. M., Lueschen, W. E., Matson, K. W., Moots, C. K., Murdock, E., Nickell, A. D., Owen, M. D. K., Paschall, E. H. II, Prochaska, L. M., Raymond, P. J., Reynolds, D. B., Rhodes, W. K., Roeth, F. W., Sprankle, P. L., Tarochinone, L. J., Tinius, C. N., Walker, R. H., Wax, L. M., Weigelt, H. D., and Padgette, S. R. (1995). “Yield Evaluation of a Glyphosate-Tolerant Soybean Line After Treatment with Glyphosate.” Crop Science 35(5), 1462–1467.Google Scholar
Delaware Agricultural Statistics Service. (2000). Delaware Agricultural Statistics 2000. Dover, DE.Google Scholar
Elmore, R. W., Roeth, F. W., Nelson, L. A., Shapiro, C. A., Klein, R. N., Knezevic, S. Z., and Martin, A. (2001). “Glyphosate-Resistant Soybean Cultivar Yields Compared with Sister Lines.” Agronomy Journal 93(2), 408–412.Google Scholar
Fernandez-Cornejo, J., Daberkow, S., and McBride, W. D. (2001). “Decomposing the Size Effect on the Adoption of Innovations: Agrobiotechnology and Precision Agriculture.” AgBioForum 4(2), 124–136.Google Scholar
Fernandez-Cornejo, J., Klotz-Ingram, C., and Jans, S. (2002). “Farm-Level Effects of Adopting Herbicide-Tolerant Soybeans in the U.S.A.” Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics 34(1), 149–163.Google Scholar
Fuglie, K. O., and Kascak, C. A. (2001). “Adoption and Diffusion of Natural-Resource-Conserving Agricultural Technology.” Review of Agricultural Economics 23(2), 386–403.Google Scholar
Greene, W. H. (2000). Econometric Analysis, 4th edition. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice-Hall, Inc. Google Scholar
Hopkins, J., and Morehart, M. (2001, November). “Farms, the Internet, and E-Commerce: Adoption and Implications.” Agricultural Outlook, pp. 17–20.Google Scholar
Klotz, C., Saha, A., and Butler, L. J. (1995). “The Role of Information in Technology Adoption: The Case of rBST in the California Dairy Industry.” Review of Agricultural Economics 17(3), 287–298.Google Scholar
Marra, M. C., Hubbell, B. J., and Carlson, G. A. (2001). “Information Quality, Technology Depreciation, and Bt Cotton Adoption in the Southeast.” Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics 26(1), 158–175.Google Scholar
McBride, W. D., and Brooks, N. (2000). “Survey Evidence on Producer Use and Costs of Genetically Modified Seed.” Agribusiness: An International Journal 16(1), 6–20.Google Scholar
Powles, S. B., Lorraine-Colwill, D. F., Dellow, J. J., and Preston, C. (1998). “Evolved Resistance to Glyphosate in Rigid Ryegrass (Lolium rigidum) in Australia.” Weed Science 46(5), 604–607.Google Scholar
Roberts, R. K., Pendergrass, R., and Hayes, R. M. (1999). “Economic Analysis of Alternative Herbicide Regimes on Roundup-Ready Soybeans.” Journal of Production Agriculture 12(3), 449–454.Google Scholar
Rogers, E. (2003). Diffusion of Innovations, 5th edition. New York: Free Press. Google Scholar
Sunding, D., and Zilberman, D. (2001). “The Agricultural Innovation Process: Research and Technology Adoption in a Changing Agricultural Sector.” In Gardner, B. L. and Rausser, G. C. (eds.), Handbook of Agricultural Economics, Volume 1A: Agricultural Production (pp. 207–261). New York: Elsevier Science.Google Scholar
Therneau, T. M., and Grambsch, P. M. (2000). Modeling Survival Data: Extending the Cox Model. New York: Springer-Verlag.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
U.S. Department of Agriculture. (1997). “1997 Agricultural Resource Management Study” (ARMS). Annual farm survey, jointly conducted by Economic Research Service and National Agricultural Statistics Service, USDA, Washington, DC. Google Scholar
U.S. Department of Agriculture, National Agricultural Statistics Service. (1998). 1997 Census of Agriculture: Delaware State-Level Data. USDA/NASS, Washington, DC. Online. Available at http://usda.mannlib.cornell.edu/reports/census/ac97ade.pdf.Google Scholar
U.S. Department of Agriculture, National Agricultural Statistics Service. (2000a). Acreage. USDA/NASS, Washington, DC. Online. Available at http://usda.mannlib.cornell.edu/reports/nassr/field/pcp-bba/acrg2000.pdf.Google Scholar
U.S. Department of Agriculture, National Agricultural Statistics Service. (2000b). Crop Production 1999 Summary. USDA/NASS, Washington, DC.Google Scholar
VanGessel, M. J. (2001). “Glyphosate-Resistant Horseweed in Delaware.” Weed Science 49(6), 703–705.Google Scholar
Wooldridge, J. W. (2003). Introductory Econometrics: A Modern Approach, 2nd edition. Mason, OH: South-Western College Publishing. Google Scholar