How can specific market demand for non-GM maize affect the profitability of Bt and conventional maize? A case study for the middle Ebro Valley, Spain

L. Riesgo, F. J. Areal, E. Rodríguez-Cerezo


This article analyses the consequences that a specific new market for non-GM (genetically modified) compound feed would have on the relative profitability of Bt and conventional maize in the middle Ebro Valley (Spain). The study uses information obtained through a survey amongst maize farmers for the year 2009. This paper evaluates the current profitability of Bt maize relative to the profitability of conventional maize showing that at present the probability of Bt maize being more profitable than conventional maize is 100%, mainly due the significantly higher yields of Bt maize. In addition the future of Bt maize is analysed in the event that a specific demand for non-GM maize for feed emerges. Simulations of price premium for conventional maize and their impact on the profitability of Bt maize in the region are described. To reduce to 50% the probability of Bt maize being more profitable than conventional maize a price premium of € 17 ton-1 for non-GM maize would be necessary.


bootstrapping; compound feed; genetically modified maize; Monte-Carlo simulation; price premium; price scenarios; Zea mays L. line MON810

Full Text:



Agustí N, Bourquet D, Spataro T, Delos M, Eychenne N, Folcher L, Arditi R, 2005. Detection, identification and geographical distribution of European corn borer larval parasitoids using molecular markers. Mol Ecol 14: 3267-3274.

Areal FJ, Riesgo L, Rodriguez-Cerezo E, 2012. Economic and agronomic impact of commercialised GM crops: A meta-analysis. J Agr Sci In press,

Brookes G, Craddock N, Kniel B, 2005. The global GM market. Implications for the European Food Chain (Brookes West and Neville Craddock Associates, UK and Biotask AG, Germany, eds.). Available online in [9 March 2012].

Costa-Font M, Gil JM, Traill WB, 2008. Consumer acceptance, valuation of and attitudes towards genetically modified food: Review and implications for food policy. Food Policy 33: 99-111.

Demont M, Tollens E, 2004. First impact of biotechnology in the EU: Bt maize adoption in Spain. Ann Appl Biol 145: 197-207.

EUROSTAT, 2012. Agricultural statistics. Available online in [9 March 2012].

Farinós GP, De La Poza M, Hernández-Crespo P, Ortego H, Castañera P, 2004. Resistance monitoring of field populations of the corn borers Sesamia nonagrioides and Ostrinia nubilalis after 5 years of Bt maize cultivation in Spain. Entomol Exp Appl 110: 23-30.

Foster M, 2010. Evidence of price premiums for non-GM grains in world markets. Proc 54th Conf Aust Agr Resour Econ Soc (AARES), Australia.

Gaskell G, Stares S, Allansdottir A, Allum N, Castro P, Esmer Y, Fischler C, Jackson J, Kronberger N, Hampel J, et al., 2010. Europeans and biotechnology in 2010. Winds of change? European Commission, Brussels.

Gómez-Barbero M, Berbel J, Rodríguez-Cerezo E, 2008. Bt corn in Spain – The performance of the EU's first GM crop. Nat Biotechnol 26: 384-386.

INE, 2012. Agrarian census for 2009. Spanish National Statistics Institute. Available online in [9 March 2012].

James C, 2011. Global status of commercialized biotech/GM crops: 2010. ISAAA Brief No. 42, NY.

Litwin MS, 1995. How to measure survey reliability and validity. SAGE Publ Ltd, London.

Lusk JL, Roosen J, Fox JA, 2003. Demand for beef from cattle administered growth hormones or fed genetically modified corn: a comparison of consumers in France, Germany, The United Kingdom and The United States. Am J Agr Econ 85: 16-29.

Lusk JL, House LO, Valli C, Jaeger SR, Moore M, Morrow JL, Trail WB, 2004. Effect of information about the benefits of biotechnology on consumer acceptance of genetically modified food: evidence from experimental auctions in the United States, England and France. Eur Rev Agric Econ 31: 179-204.

Lusk JL, Jamal M, Kurlander L, Roucan M, Taulman L, 2005. A meta analysis of genetically modified food valuation studies. J Agr Resour Econ 30: 28-44.

Magnusson MK, Hursti UK, 2002. Consumer attitudes towards genetically modified foods. Appetite 39: 9-24.

MAGRAMA, 2012a. Public register of genetically modified organisms. Spanish Ministry of Agriculture, Food and Environment. Available online in [9 March 2012].

MAGRAMA, 2012b. Agricultural Statistics Annual report 2010 (Anuario de Estadística 2010). Spanish Ministry of Agriculture, Food and Environment, Madrid. Available online in [9 March 2012].

Moon W, Balasubramanian SK, 2003. Is there a market for genetically modified foods in Europe? Contingent valuation of GM and non-GM breakfast cereals in the United Kingdom. AgBioForum 6: 128-133.

Nowicki P, Aramyan L, Baltussen W, Dvortsin L, Jongeneel R, Pérez-Domínguez I, Van Wagenberg C, Kalaitzandonakes N, Kaufman J, Miller D, et al., 2010. Study on the implications of asynchronous GMO approvals for EU imports of animal feed products. Directorate General of Agriculture and Rural Development, European Commission, Brussels. Available online in [9 March 2012].

O'Callaghan M, 2009. GM-free production: A unique selling point for Ireland – The food island Ireland: GM-free Ireland network. Ed. GM-free Ireland Network. Available online in [9 March 2012].

Regional Ministry of Agriculture of Aragon, 2012. Agricultural statistics on maize prices. Available online in [9 March 2012].

Regional Ministry of Agriculture of Catalonia, 2012. Agricultural statistics on maize prices. Available online in [9 March 2012].

Sabalza M, Miralpeix B, Twyman RM, Capell T, Christou P, 2011. EU legitimizes GM crop exclusion zones. Nat Biotechnol 29: 315-317.

DOI: 10.5424/sjar/2012104-448-11