DIFFUSION PROCESS IN NETWORKS THE CASE OF GMO SOYBEAN IN ARGENTINA THE CASE OF GMO SOYBEAN IN ARGENTINA Project : The impact of biotechnology on Argentine production Roberto Bisang
ARGENTINA’S PRODUCTIVE PERFORMANCE REMARKS � Local production of grains and oil seeds in 2002 doubled 1990 figures. � Soybean production in 2002 tripled 1995 figures. � Land devoted to soybean production grew 200% between 1995 and 2002. � Soybean represents almost 50% of total grain and oil seeds cropped in 2002. � Argentina's share in the international market of soy oil and pellets amounts to about 40%. � Soybean (oil, pellets and other forms) accounts for almost 30% of Argentine total exports. Why? A. A quick diffusion process of a new technological package B. Structural changes Networking
SOYBEAN: BUILDING A NEW TECNOLOGICAL PACKAGE Herbicide + Fertilizer Zero Tillage NP NP Seeds = Conventional Genetics + Biotechnology Effects : o Higher yields o Cost reduction o Lesser fuel consumption o Improved land use (double cropping) o Erosion control o Easy handling
GMO SOYBEAN First Generation On process � Transfection is carried out through Single A gene resistant to plasmid cut Agrobacterium cell Glyphosate is Agrobacterium plasmid extracted in the new gene Cells modify Modified Agrobacterium cell New plant DNA containing the DNA-receptive new gene plant New Glyphosate-resistant soy Second Generation On Product �
TILLAGE CONVENTIONAL ZERO TILLAGE 1. Seed-bed preparation 2/3 1. Seed-bed preparation 1 step only steps 2. Seeding + Fertilizer 1 Step 2. Seeding 1 step 3. Weeds control 3. Covering 1 step 4. Fertilizer 5. Weeds control
TECHNOLOGICAL PATH HERBICIDES MACHINERY SEEDS 70´S Conventional Introduction 70´S PARAQUATT Drill Seeding (INTA/Private) (by ICI) (Private + Public Agency) Seeds 80´S 80´S + GMO GLYPHOSATE First Mechanic Local varieties Gene Seeds of seed Zero Tillage (1985) (Nidera) (INTA + Local Breeders) Drill Seeding + (Monsanto) Biocides Automatic 90´S 90´S RR Soybean Zero Tillage (Nidera Monsanto Drill Seeding Syngenta) NEW PACKAGE
DIFFUSION OF NEW TECHNOLOGICAL PACKAGE Zero Tillage in Soybean 12000000 10000000 Total 67% 8000000 6000000 ZT 4000000 2000000 0 1980/81 1981/82 1982/83 1983/84 1984/85 1985/86 1986/87 1987/88 1988/89 1989/90 1990/91 1991/92 1992/93 1993/94 1994/95 1995/96 1996/97 1997/98 1998/99 1999/00 2000/01 2001/02* Ha’s Total sown -Has- ZERO TILLAGE Zero Tillage -Has- Zero Tillage sown
DIFFUSION OF NEW TECHNOLOGICAL PACKAGE GMO in Soybean 12000000 ��������������� 91 % ������������� ��������������� 10000000 ������������� ������������� �������������� ������������� ������������� �������������� ������������� 8000000 �������������� ������������� �������������� �������������� ������������� 6000000 ������������� ������������� ������������ �������������� �������������� ������������� ������������� ������������� ������������� �������������� ������������� �������������� ������������� ������������� ������������� 4000000 �������������� ������������� ������������� ������������ ������������� �������������� �������������� ������������� ������������ ������������� �������������� 2000000 �������������� ������������� 0 Ha’s 1980/81 1982/83 1984/85 1986/87 1988/89 1990/91 1992/93 1994/95 1996/97 1998/99 2000/01 Years ����������������������� Total sown -Has- Seeds Sown GMO Transgenic Seeds -Has-
NETWORKS IN SOYBEAN F AAPRESID I N Machinery A INTA SUBCONTRATORS Suppliers N C SAGPYA I LANDOWNERS GMO E ET seeds S R CONABIA U A Service fertilizer P L Centers P L glyphosate Private CONTRACTS I Diffusion CONTRACTS E Nets others R S CRUSHING MILL EXPORTS (OIL - Others)
THE DYNAMICS OF DIFFUSSION I Prices Inputs Products Assets Previous Platform Suppliers of Inputs Equipment Seed Other Technical Productive Regulatory NEW NEW Markets Regulatory Framework PACKAGE PACKAGE Local International Production Import Technology Inputs Products Agents Pools Financial Market Subcontractors Landowners Public Private
THE DYNAMICS OF DIFFUSION II � Why networking? � How to improve benefits? (flux effects) How to cooperate in order � How to revalue fixed assets? (stock effects) to compete? A. FROM AN INDIVIDUAL TO A COLLECTIVE UTILITY META-FUNCTION � GMO seeds and inputs suppliers . Improve demand . Full use of installed capacity � Local seed breeders . Increase demand for marginal varieties � Service Centers . Improve sales . Generate tacit knowledge as a commercial surplus � Subcontractors . Subcontractors set themselves up in business . Full use of fixed assets
� Landowners . Reduce risk . Lesser capital uses . Higher rotation of fixed capital . Revaluation of land prices � Crushing industries . Full capacity use . Low risk in raw material supply � Government . Increased tax base (on flux or capital) B. EXTERNALITIES � GMO seeds and inputs suppliers . Same process and gene applied to different varieties . Tacit knowledge on land/weed � Subcontractors managing � Landowners . Lower risk . Environmentally friendly
C. FROM PUBLIC TO CLUB GOODS Tacit knowledge in nets . Soil management . Building up of the production function Development of conventions or contracts . Land-working routines D. THE PROMOTING AGENT (CONTROL NODES) ○ Public in pre – competition ○ Private Market/Price
Recommend
More recommend