6.1 New knowledge
In 2006, the IPTS published a report that includes analyses of the costs of co-existence in primary production. The report contains a number of case studies of the crops maize, sugar beet, cotton and oilseed rape. These regional case studies take their starting point in current local conditions such as field size, the mutual location of the fields, crop rotations and cropping methods.
The report’s main emphasis is on grain maize production as GM maize is now grown in several EU countries.
The results of the report are not directly applicable to Danish conditions, because the crops studied, the co-existence measures and the cropping systems, rotation and scale are different from those in Denmark.
There are also a number of other studies of selected European situations, but again these are not particularly applicable to Danish conditions.
Under Danish conditions, we presuppose that the GM grower will adapt his cropping plans (location of crops) and crop rotations to ensure co-existence, while most European studies focus on how crop rotations and cropping plans will be affected and on the economic consequences of possible changes.
6.2 Danish conditions
The act on co-existence established guidelines for the individual farmer as regards the cultivation of GM crops, and at the same time it established that it is the responsibility of the GM grower to ensure that appropriate co-existence measures are in place. Thus, conventional and organic growers are not put to expense in this connection.
However, since the act was passed, there has been no commercial cultivation of GM crops, and therefore we have no practical experience of the economic consequences of growing GM crops under Danish conditions.
The co-existence regulations on growing GM crops require that the GM grower:
x observes specific separation distances and cropping intervals, and controls volunteers x cleans machinery and transport equipment when changing from GM crops to conventional
or organic crops
x makes notification of GM crop areas to authorities
x informs neighbours (the distance to neighbours that must be informed depends on the crop)
x pays a fee of 100 DKK per hectare of GM crop (compensation fund) x participate in a training course on GM growing (”GM drivers license”).
The GM grower is now subject to a set of regulations that makes certain requirements on the grower but also affords some protection as regards liability, as long as the GM cultivation is carried out according to the regulations.
The crop specific separation distances are the main instrument for ensuring co-existence in practice.
However, the ministerial order has also opened up the possibility of reducing the separation distances through separate agreements between the GM grower and his neighbours, but if so, the persons involved will no longer be covered by the compensation scheme.
It is our assessment that, under Danish conditions, the separation distances can be met without involving additional expenditure by the GM grower as this factor will be part of the crop rotation/field planning.
However, the separation distances may have an economic influence if GM crops are grown extensively. This may be the case with maize growing in Himmerland and South Jutland, where extensive growing may make it difficult to comply with the separation distances. Here, buffer zones with conventional maize sown around the GM maize field could be a solution.
The costs of buffer zones will depend on factors such as field size and shape, the width of the buffer zone and the difference in yield between conventional and GM maize. Separate sowing and management of the buffer zones will also mean extra costs, which, however, can be minimised through planning and adaptation of the width of the buffer zone to the available machinery.
Another possibility could be that groups of neighbouring farmers growing GM maize establish a buffer zone around the outer fields, which will lower the total costs considerably.
The cultivation fee of 100 DKK per hectare of GM crop must be added to the costs of co-existence.
The fee contributes to the so-called compensation fund, which will pay compensation to the neighbours of the GM grower in case of adventitious outcrossing with neighbouring crops. Provided that the GM grower has complied with the regulations for GM growers, the compensation fund ensures that the grower will not become liable for adventitious incidents. The cultivation fee should therefore be seen as an insurance scheme. It should be noted that, at present, it is not possible to insure against GM admixture with insurance companies.
The cost of participation in the course for GM growers (”GM drivers license”) is a non-recurrent cost. The course is compulsory for both owners and staff on farms growing GM crops, and the same will apply to machinery pools and contractors working with GM crops. Farm managers must attend a 2-day course, while staff must attend a 1-day course. The costs of a 2-day course are considered to be approx. 5-6,000 DKK, whereas a 1-day course is approx. 2,500 DKK. The courses are expected to become a part of the ordinary education programme at agricultural colleges within a few years.
The compulsory ”GM drivers license” can be a significant initial cost for farmers with several employees and for machinery pools, but the cost must be compared with the GM crop area and should not be considered an economic barrier to the growing of GM crops. At the same time, the
course will supply the GM grower with the necessary knowledge about GM crops so that the regulations on GM growing can be complied with in a cost-effective way.
The extra costs of notification of GM crops and informing neighbours are considered to be
insignificant. The notification of GM crops takes place via the system of per hectare aid and will not result in further administrative burdens.