Economics-Monsanto's Roundup Case Study

| Monsanto continues to grow with future acquisitions of other companies in the industry (i.e. Asgrow Agronomics, Holden’s Foundation Seeds, Corn States Hybrid Service, and DeKalb Genetics Corp.).- Monsanto expands its production of genetically modified seed products which are herbicide tolerant. These include, “Roundup Ready Canola,” “Roundup Ready Cotton,” and “Roundup Ready Corn.”- Monsanto is also the first company to introduce a dual genetically engineered seed with protection from both insects and herbicides (cotton and corn seeds).

The likely impact on food prices in the United States if the supply of oranges were reduced, and the consumption of corn for fuel was to increase, would be to expect an increase in food prices. When events such as a deep freeze happen and the result is a decrease of supply the market will experience an increase in the equilibrium price if all other things remain consistent. If the president called for an increase in ethanol produced from corn, the supply of corn available to provide as food will decrease, and the decrease

The farmers then give their products to the manufacturers, who represent the bottleneck of the food system (21). “The ten largest companies control half of the world’s seed supply. …Ten firms control 90% of the nearly $38.6 billion pesticide markets (111-112).” Monsanto, being one of the ten companies that controls the world’s seed supply, is a company that has patents on all of its seeds and products. It produces genetically modified crops that are resistant to its own pesticides and herbicides, so that when a pesticide or herbicide is sprayed and it destroys all plants, the Monsanto seed survives because of its resistance. The reason that Monsanto is able to stay in business is because of the economic benefit it poses for the farmers. They are able to produce their crops at a much higher yield because they are losing less of their crops to pests. This higher yield results in lower costs for the consumers as well (Planes). As discussed

Figure 4 in Appendix A demonstrates the supply and demand of white potatoes. In the short run price, demand and supply with all increase because of the commodity being added to the program. While in the long run both supply and demand will increase. Price will decrease because consumers will keep demand high enough to have equilibrium at a lower price than in the short run. By adding the proposed changes white potato farmers will be better off.

The main ingredient used in Monsanto produce is glyphosate. Companies are injecting the plants’ seeds with glyphosate, which alters the plants’ DNA. Glyphosate is an herbicide, the same chemical used in Roundup. It is toxic to plants. Glyphosates’ purpose is to kill off unwanted weeds. Companies are injecting chemicals, whose main purpose is to kill plants, into the DNA of our foods (Hamblin). The World Health Organization (WHO) cancer agency has declared that glyphosate is a “probable human carcinogen” (Hamblin). Research conducted by WHO shows that glyphosate increases breast cancer cell growth. Researchers determined that Monsanto’s Roundup is an “exnoestrogen,” which is an unknown estrogen that imitates real estrogen in our bodies. This manipulation of estrogen can cause several problems within our bodies, such as “increased risk of various cancers, premature puberty, thyroid issues, infertility, and more”

Monsanto is an American agrochemical corporation which manufactures pesticides and GMO crops. One of the most well recognized herbicides is Monsanto’s Roundup, which contains the carcinogen glyphosate. To prevent from killing the crops when farmers apply Roundup to their fields, Monsanto invented GMO versions of many staple crops such as corn, soybeans, and cotton which resist Roundup. Like the weeds, these GMO crops still absorb glyphosate, however the crops are able to stay alive through changes in their genetic makeup which make them herbicide resistant. The herbicide tolerance of certain crops has been adopted because it, “simplifies weed control to the use of a single herbicide and a flexible and easy management strategy” (Labrada, 2003), as well as decreasing the cost of weed control programs. As a result, Monsanto bought out most small farms and now owns 80% of the U.S. market share of corn and 93% of the U.S. market share of soy, which are then sold to modern food processing. Upwards of 75% of the processed food on American supermarket shelves contain genetically engineered ingredients. Not only are Americans consuming massive amounts of GMOs, which pose a huge health risk themselves, they are also consuming massive amounts of glyphosate, a chemical known to cause cancer and birth defects (Kruger, 2014). If society stopped consuming carcinogens, the cancer epidemic will be

However, all that Round up residue doesn’t just wash of the crops. Then we put harmful chemicals into our body. Why would the U.S. fall into the Trap of Monsanto? Countless other countries like the UK have entirely banned Monsanto. Apparently the U.S. fell into what Monsanto wants us to think.

We then discover that it has been legal to patent life since the 1980s, and learn about the company Monsanto’s round up resistant soybean that now makes up 90% of the soybean market. Monsanto

It doesn’t help that Monsanto also has power in politics, one of the Monsanto chiefs for food safety, Michael Taylor was actually appointed by Barrack Obama himself. Barrack Obama also appointed his Supreme Court judge: Elena Kagan, who happens to be the chief defender of Monsanto and GMO’s. Whether Republican or Democratic, Monsanto wields a strong power within politics that helps give them an edge in keeping their company going. (Obama). There are good aspects of Monsanto, like the efficiency of cheap seeds, and crops that can withstand the harsh behaviors of weathers, and the ability the crops have to survive a longer time. But not even the cheapest crops can cover up Monsanto’s long history of evil, from polluting the environment with PCB’s, the chemical Agent Orange, and the weed killer “Round-Up Ready”, to Monopolizing itself to being the owner of 90% of the seed industry and shutting down small

Monsanto’s Roundup Ready Soybean (RRS) is a genetically engineered variety of soybeans, which contains gene sequences from a cauliflower mosaic virus (CMV), a petunia, and a bacterium (Agrobacterium sp.) (Greenpeace, 1997). The two bacterial genes, in short, provide for resistance against Roundup, resulting in a crop of soybeans that can be sprayed with Roundup to protect it from weeds, while not injuring it. In 1996, U.S. farmers harvested about 1.2 million acres of Roundup Ready Soybeans, and although this crop represented only about 2 percent of U.S. soybeans, it will be mixed with conventional soybeans – unlabeled – to become part of as much as 60 percent of all processed foods that contain some soy-based ingredient (Bruno, 1997). In the United States, most consumers are likely to have already ingested small amounts of transgenic soy in such common food as margarine, chocolate, baby food, and

Additionally, big business controls the farmers by capitalizing on widely used commodities. For example, the company Monsanto which is based in St. Louis, Missouri protects its dominance over the genetically modified crops such as the soy bean with the use of a patent law. Because of this, Monsanto’s patented genes “account for 95 percent of all soy beans and 80 percent of all corn grown in the U.S.,” (Associated Press). Although genetically modifying the soy bean crop has made it more readily available and more sustainable, this comes at a high price to farmers. Monsanto continues to raise their prices, which forces farmers to accrue even more debt, and there is no sign of the rise in the seed prices stopping. Since a lot of the farmers are under contract with Monsanto, there is nothing they can do about this unethical policy in fear of losing their job.

Genetically Modified foods are made to withstand harsher condition than normal soybeans, meaning that more of them will survive to then be sold. Furthermore, these GM soybeans will also last longer due to their implanted gene. With a bigger amount of soybeans, the farmers can then allow the soybeans to be sold for a cheaper price, which will ensure that customers will buy their products as they are cheaper than others. Due to those reasons, farmers with the right to use GM soybeans will make more money and do so faster as they will have more soybeans to sell. This however is a disadvantage for small farms who do not have enough money or who don’t want to buy GM soybeans as they will produce fewer soybeans as they do not possess the genes which make them resist herbicides and harsher weather. A smaller amount of soybeans to sell will then make the farmers without the right to use GM soybeans have less income. Furthermore, these farmers are unable to make the soybeans cheaper as they would then not make any profit. Another factor which is heavily impacted by the GM soybeans is the

_The world supply of sugar looks perfectly elastic (horizontal) from the point of view of the U.S. market, at a price of 8.3 cents per pound. This conclusion comes from two statements in the case: "Annual world sales of sugar amount to roughly $100 billion" and "Thus, for our analysis the 2001 world price of 8.3 cents per pound is assumed to be constant outside the United States." In other words, because the U.S. sugar market is a small fraction of global sugar trade, we can reasonably assume that the U.S. is a price-taker in the world market, which means that it could import any quantity at the 2001 world price._

The objective of this report is to analyze the differences in Monsanto’s experiences in the United States and Europe and the reasons of opposition in Europe, despite that, why Monsanto pushed ahead so hard.

Monsanto is a company that some people may not be explicitly familiar with on a first name basis. However, the work that the company has done over the last century, with a larger emphasis on its most recent ventures, have been deeply engrained in our lives, our food, and our economy. Monsanto has those who advocate on their behalf in addition to their naysayers. While Monsanto has made huge strides in terms of biotechnology over the last couple of decades, their accomplishments, and the relevant methods, have not been free of criticism and controversy. In order to analyze Monsanto’s corporate environment, it is important to first explore their Strengths, Weaknesses,