Crop biotechnology has allowed growers to continue to produce more food, feed, fuel and fiber with fewer inputs. This increase in productivity allows American families to spend only 10.7% of their income on food, the lowest level in history. Farmers have also benefited from biotechnology--these crops have added an additional $27 billion to farm income in both developed and developing nations. This trend is likely to accelerate as new traits for enhanced stress tolerance and nutrient utilization further reduces input costs.

• Farmers’ adoption of biotech crops has jumped dramatically, due to expected lower production costs, higher yields and reduced pesticide use.
  (http://www.ers.usda.gov/Briefing/biotechnology/chapter1.htm)
• There have been substantial net economic benefits at the farm level amounting to $5 billion in 2005 and $27 billion for the ten year period. Brookes, G. & Barfoot, P. (2006), Global impact of biotech crops: Socio-economic and environmental effects in the first ten years of commercial use AgBioForum, 9(3), 139-151. (http://www.agbioforum.org/v9n3/v9n3a02-brookes.htm)
• In 2005 U.S. growers continued to lead the world in the adoption of Biotechnology derived crops with approximately 123 million acres. . (Sankula (2006) Quantification of the Impacts on US Agriculture of Biotechnology-Derived Crops Planted in 2005. Published by the National Center for Food and Agricultural Policy). (http://www.ncfap.org/whatwedo/pdf/2005biotechimpacts-finalversion.pdf)
• The accumulated global value for the eleven-year period, since biotech crops were first commercialized in 1996, is estimated at US$42.4 billion. The global value of the biotech crop market is projected at approximately US$7.5 billion for 2008. ISAAA Brief 37-2007: Executive Summary Global Status of Commercialized Biotech/GM Crops: 2007 (http://www.isaaa.org/resources/publications/briefs/37/executivesummary/default.html)
• Gains in farm income have arisen in the soybean sector, largely from cost savings, where the $2.84 billion additional income generated by GM HT soybeans in 2005 has been equivalent to adding 7.1% to the value of the crop in the GM growing countries. Brookes, G. & Barfoot, P. (2006), Global impact of biotech crops: Socio-economic and environmental effects in the first ten years of commercial use AgBioForum, 9(3), 139-151. (http://www.agbioforum.org/v9n3/v9n3a02-brookes.htm)
• Agricultural biotechnology does not only help large growers in developed nations. A study by Stephen Morse and coworkers which analyzed the profitability of more than 2200 small farmers in South Africa who either grew bollworm-resistant cotton or conventional cotton during 1998-2001. They found that those growers who used biotechnology increased their margin per hector from $86-93 above farmers who used conventional crops. Morse et. al. (2004) Nature Biotechnology 22:379-380
• A number of EU Member States have begun field testing of biotech crops. In France, for example, there are field trials scheduled for maize, grape, poplar, fescue, sugar beet, and tobacco. (http://gmoinfo.jrc.it/gmp_browse.aspx)
• In 2007, Bt cotton was planted in China by 7.1 million small and resource-poor farmers on 3.8 million hectares, (up from 3.5 million hectares in 2006) which is equivalent to 69% of the 5.5 million hectares of all cotton planted in China. ISAAA Brief 37-2007: Executive Summary Global Status of Commercialized Biotech/GM Crops: 2007 (http://www.isaaa.org/resources/publications/briefs/37/executivesummary/default.html)

Click here to read a testimonial from a grower.
Dave Nelson Testimonial - PDF