Bt or not Bt? Tools for regulatory decision making concerning genetically modified (Bt) corn

Abstract

Regulation of Bt corn and other genetically modified (GM) crops in the United States is based upon the "best available science;" however, many stakeholders are dissatisfied with GM crop regulation in the US and worldwide. This dissertation addresses the question of why this is so, and assesses analytical tools that could inform the policymakers. Bt corn produces a pesticide that is effective against common corn pests. As a crop, food, and pesticide-producing plant, it is regulated by three governmental agencies in the US. A policy analysis reveals the strengths in the three-agency regulatory system, as well as potential gaps that lead to vulnerabilities in GM crop regulation and explain stakeholder concerns. Four types of analysis are suggested to better inform policymakers: benefit-cost analysis, economic impacts analysis, analysis of uncertainty, and analysis of public opinion. Accounting for a full suite of economic and environmental impacts, the benefit-cost analysis shows that the current level of Bt corn planting provides a net value to US society of several hundred million dollars. This is but a small fraction of the total US corn industry; though where it is planted, it provides a 26% gain per acre over conventional corn. The economic impacts analysis shows that Bt corn growers and industry are the main beneficiaries of Bt corn's value, while the greater public experiences no significant gain and non-Bt corn growers experience a 6.7% loss in revenue (due to increased supply driving down corn prices). Methods to quantify uncertainty for policymaking are developed using real and rational option theories. Real option theory reveals conditions under which the uncertainty in Bt corn's impacts are so large as to favor a regulatory decision to postpone its commercialization until those uncertainties are better resolved. A study of public attitudes toward genetically modified foods explains why people are more risk-averse toward GM foods compared with other hazards of comparable or greater risks, and identifies some major conceptions and misconceptions that the public holds regarding GM foods. These analyses lead to a set of policy recommendations for improving Bt corn (and general GM crop) regulation in the United States.