Do some GMO plants provide bigger yields and more efficient use of land?

Question

I was told that some Genetically Modified Organisms (GMOs) provide bigger crop yields and a more efficient use of land compared to unmodified crops.

Monsanto claim:

These [GMO] seeds grow into plants that might use water more efficiently, require less farmland or better withstand pests like bugs or weeds.

Is that true?

Welcome to SE.Skeptics! This site's all about checking out claims that you read or hear, so questions should generally contain a link to a particular source. In this case, there's little doubt that the claim that you're asking about exists; it'd be good if you could select a reputable source and edit the corresponding link into the question. — Nat, Jun 05 '17 at 03:46
Possible duplicate: ["Organic food is worse for the environment because it requires more land than non-organic food"](https://skeptics.stackexchange.com/questions/2064/organic-food-is-worse-for-the-environment-because-it-requires-more-land-than-non) — Nat, Jun 05 '17 at 03:51
@BobTheAverage Could you elaborate? To me, this question's something like, **"_Do GMO's use land more efficiently?_"** while the other's **"_Do non-GMO's use land less efficiently?_"** — Nat, Jun 05 '17 at 04:17
@Nat If I take non-GMO tomatoes, and add artificial fertilizer they are neither GMO nor organic. Food does not have to be one or the other. — BobTheAverage, Jun 05 '17 at 04:21
@BobTheAverage Agreed, though the above question's asking about just one or the other, isn't it? **"_Genetically Modified Organism's (GMO's) provide bigger crop yields and a more efficient use of land compared to organic crops_"**. While I agree that the end result isn't an exact duplicate, it does seem pretty close. — Nat, Jun 05 '17 at 04:23
@Nat The linked question is comparing organic to non-organic. This question is comparing GMO to organic. I suspect that an answerer will be able to take sources from your linked question, but they are distinct questions. They are only the same if you think all non-organic food is GMO. — BobTheAverage, Jun 05 '17 at 04:28
Let us [continue this discussion in chat](http://chat.stackexchange.com/rooms/59892/discussion-between-nat-and-bobtheaverage). — Nat, Jun 05 '17 at 04:32
Clarified that the claim is about *some* GMO, and not a general claim about *all* GMO. — Sklivvz, Jun 05 '17 at 12:32
Main GMO crops offer pesticide/herbicide resistance. Improved pest and weed control definitely improve yield. I'm not quite sure if that's what the claim is about, too vaguely worded. — user5341, Jun 06 '17 at 16:51
Note the claim is only that they *might*. But also the whole point of GMO plants is to make them more efficient. — OrangeDog, Jun 07 '17 at 12:36

score 5 · Answer 1 · answered Jun 10 '17 at 20:54

5

Yes.

This meta-analysis read 147 original scientific papers about GMO crops. On average those papers found a 22% increase in crop yields and a 37% decrease in pesticide use for GMO vs non-GMO crops.

The meta analysis has been quite highly cited and the citing papers I looked at, (1 2), repeat the conclusions of the meta-analysis uncritically. The meta-analysis appears to represent some scientific consensus.

answered Jun 10 '17 at 20:54

BobTheAverage

11,961
6
43
54

Surely it depends on the timescale. If I were to take all the fertilizer in the world and apply it to one field, that would increase my yields dramatically, but not next year when there was no fertilizer left. The opponents of GMO crops, to my knowledge, are not claiming they don't work, that would be ludicrous, but that the long term effects such as those on the wider environment will reduce yields in the long run. It's like asking, do sleeping pills help you sleep and citing a load of papers saying they do without any regard for the fact that they gradually stop working in the long run. – Isaacson Jun 12 '17 at 09:33
2

@Isaacson: What difference does GMO and non-GMO make on time scale? GMO is just a technique for producing new breeds, not any physically identifiable trait of an organism. We've been producing new breeds of organisms for the past 10000 years. The timescale effect has to do with intensive farming which would be the same regardless of weather or not a crop is GMO (indeed, non-GMO would be worse because they demand more resources to get the same yield) – slebetman Jun 12 '17 at 15:22
Some GMO crops are bred to produce pesticide like toxins which could theoretically be damaging to other forms of insect, which could have a long term negative impact on the ecology of the crop growing area and so reduce yield, but that's just an example. The point is genetics is a pretty complex thing and simply having a look at yields over a few years and declaring the whole thing a more efficient use of land is irresponsibly simplistic. – Isaacson Jun 12 '17 at 17:19
2

@Isaacson The claim in the question did not ask about long term effects. If it did, your comments would be relevant. – BobTheAverage Jun 12 '17 at 17:22
It didn't mention the timescale at all so no reason to presume short or long, neither did your answer specify that it was referring only to the short term, hence the comments to clarify that it is an issue. – Isaacson Jun 12 '17 at 18:24
3

@Isaacson taking that sort of open ended approach nothing can ever be accepted. example: "Do vaccines cause autism?" "Sure all these studies show no but what if they're secretly causing a buildup of chemical X which will cause a billion cases of autism 10 generations from now?" merely pointing to remote possibilities that have not yet been falsified and combining it with appeals to ignorance doesn't provide much useful info. – Murphy Jun 13 '17 at 16:09
@Murphy So basically as long as something yields an improvement in a single short term indicator of success we should plough on regardless? That kind of short-sighted attitude is how we've ended up with many of the problems we have; antibiotic resistance, global warming, financial crashes, pollinator population declines... I could go on. All the result of simply ploughing on with an idea just because it provides some short term gain without taking account of the long term effects. – Isaacson Jun 14 '17 at 06:43

Do some GMO plants provide bigger yields and more efficient use of land?

1 Answers1