Cited by 25Genetically Modified Organisms ResearchBiotechnology and Related FieldsAgricultural Productivity and Crop Improvement

Demystification of GM crop costs: releasing late blight resistant potato varieties as public goods in developing countries

Open access
Schiek, Benjamin, Hareau, Guy, Baguma, Yona, Medakker, Akshat, Douches, David, Shotkoski, Frank, Ghislain, Marc·2016·International Journal of Biotechnology

Abstract

A few studies have reported some of the costs associated with bringing to market genetically-modified (GM) crops but no comprehensive studies exist on the real cost of the entire process of developing and releasing one GM variety by a not-for-profit institution in a developing country for sustainable agriculture. Despite the lack of documented studies, it is commonly assumed that such an undertaking is cost prohibitive, based on mere hearsay, and on two private sector cost assessments. The present study assesses the costs and the time expenditures to two not-for-profit programs, one lead by CIP and the other by Cornell University, of developing a late blight resistant (LBr) potato variety for release in one developing country. CIP's costs run to $1.6 million over eight years, while Cornell's costs amount to $1.4 million over nine years. Exogenous disturbances might result in insignificant increases in cost, but can increase time expenditure significantly. A sensitivity analysis revealed that the total cost is markedly influenced by technical parameters determining the production and identification of the pre-commercial LBr transgenic event.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1504/ijbt.2016.077942

Cites

15 of 15 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Growing consumer concerns about GM foods have prevented companies and countries from commercializing GM versions of typical food crops such as wheat and rice.

    “growing consumer concerns about GM foods have prevented companies and countries from commercializing GM versions of typical food crops such as wheat and rice ( 25 , 30 ).”

    From Environmental impacts of genetically modified crops (2024) · cites this paper as [25]

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

1 of the 16 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Schiek, B., Hareau, G., Baguma, Y., Medakker, A., Douches, D., Shotkoski, F., & Ghislain, M.
Affiliations
  • International Potato Center (PE)
  • National Agricultural Research Organisation (UG)
  • Michigan State University (US)
  • Cornell University (US)
Venue
International Journal of Biotechnology
Published
2016
Volume
14
Issue
2
Pages
112
ISSN
  • 0963-6048 (ISSN-L)
  • 1741-5020
OpenAlex
W2481568014
Cited by
25
References
16
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 1 · 2021: 2 · 2020: 2 · 2019: 5 · 2018: 3 · 2017: 3
FWCI
4.29
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • International Journal of Biotechnology (publishedVersion)
  • CGSPace A Repository of Agricultural Research Outputs (Consultative Group for International Agricultural Research) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Plant Science › Genetically Modified Organisms Research
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Biotechnology and Related Fields
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Agronomy and Crop Science › Agricultural Productivity and Crop Improvement
Keywords
genetically modified crops, late blight resistance, potato, cost evaluation, public goods, developing countries, sustainable agriculture, International Potato Center, Cornell University, exogenous disturbances, sensitivity analysis

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review