David Ervin - Academia.edu (original) (raw)

Papers by David Ervin

Farmers are experiencing increasing numbers of herbicide resistant weeds across most areas of the... more Farmers are experiencing increasing numbers of herbicide resistant weeds across most areas of the country. Left unchecked, this pattern threatens crop yields, farm profit, community cohesion, and environmental quality. Current public and private efforts to stem the tide of weed resistance for the most part have failed. Papers in this issue examine factors leading to weed resistance, socioeconomic barriers to resistance management, and new policy options moving forward. But first, it's important to understand how we arrived in this predicament. The adoption of genetically modified crop (GMO) varieties that are herbicide resistant (HR) has been rapid and widespread. HR crops first became commercially available in 1996. Today 89% or more of U.S. corn, cotton, soybean, and sugar beet acreage are planted to HR varieties. There are similarly high adoption rates for HR canola in Canada and the United States. In the United States, HR alfalfa-more recently introduced-accounts for roughly a third of newly seeded acreage. HR cotton and soybean varieties now account for the majority of global acreage of these crops. Most HR crop acreage is planted to glyphosate resistant (GR) varieties. Because the herbicide glyphosate controls more than 300 weed species, growers can control many broadleaf and grass weeds effectively using one herbicide instead of many different ones. Adoption of HR crops has been rapid despite mixed evidence that they increase farm profits. Researchers have suggested HR crops provide benefits difficult to capture using standard farm profit estimates. These benefits include simplification of weed-management decisions, convenience, increased flexibility in timing, reduced crop damage, lower environmental risk, lower management time requirements, and compatibility with conservation tillage. Growing weed resistance to other herbicides may also account for the popularity of GR varieties. Weed scientists stress that, to delay the evolution of weed resistance, it is critical to use a diversified mix of weed control strategies. Growers can use non-chemical control (such as tillage, row spacing, and crop rotations) along with different chemical controls. If herbicides are used, avoiding reliance on herbicides with the same mechanism of action (MOA) is crucial. The widespread adoption of GR crops in the United States, though, led to a dramatic reduction in the diversity of weed control tactics. Growers have relied less on non-chemical control methods and among chemical methods, have relied heavily on glyphosate, often relying on multiple applications of only glyphosate.

A review of the literature shows that the environmental risks and benefits of genetically modifie... more A review of the literature shows that the environmental risks and benefits of genetically modified crops have varying degrees of certainty. For example, field studies have documented growing resistance to highly used pesticides. However, the risks of gene flow and deleterious effects on non-target organisms have not been evaluated at large field scales. Similarly, reduced pesticide use and toxicity have been estimated for some transgenic crops in some regions. Yet, the effects of herbicideresistant crops on erosion, carbon loss and supplemental water use generally have not been evaluated. Recent assessments have concluded that inadequate monitoring and evaluation of the ecological risks are being conducted. Among other limitations, the US regulatory system must rely on the small science base to assess the biophysical risks of transgenic crops. The system evaluates the occurrence of a suite of hazards for all such crops and applies the standard science protocol of minimizing type-I error (i.e., rejecting the null hypothesis of no environmental risk, when in fact the null is true). However, genetically modified crops vary widely in their potential for environmental risks, some with minor and others with major possible ecological disruptions. We illustrate a differentiated risk-assessment process based on the 'novelty' of the genetically modified organism, as measured by the genetic distance from its source of variation. As 'novelty' increases, information about hazards and their probabilities generally diminishes and more precautionary risk-assessment standards would be invoked. Three different models are illustrated: (1) the current US approach that controls type-I error for crops that are close to conventionally bred crops; (2) a model for transgenic and similar crops that minimizes type-II error (i.e., accepting the null hypothesis when the alternative of significant ecological effect is true) at a moderate power of test standard, and (3) a model for the most novel and complex genetically modified crops that imposes a very high power of test standard. The discussion then develops parallel risk-management approaches that include economic costs for the first and second models. The paper concludes with a discussion of how a biosafety regulatory system that effectively distinguishes the relative risks of genetically modified organisms can stimulate public and private research into a new generation of biotechnology crops that reduce unwanted environmental risks and perhaps provide ecological benefits.

Weeds invade farms, grow and reproduce aggressively. For more than half a century, the primary to... more Weeds invade farms, grow and reproduce aggressively. For more than half a century, the primary tool used by farmers to control weeds has been herbicides, but the effectiveness of herbicides is declining due to herbicide resistance. An option available for farmers to better balance weed control and herbicide resistance is to adopt resistance management practices that prevent or slow the evolution of resistance. However, the adoption of resistance management has been low. This study aims to explore the impact of economic and behavioral factors on a farmer’s choice over chemical, cultural and mechanical methods of weed control. We use multivariate regression analysis and 2016 farm-level weed management data from farmers in 28 states across the U.S. to identify the farmer and farm operation characteristics that are most associated with farmers’ weed management decisions. The analysis shows that the negative externality from a neighbor’s perceived lack of adoption of herbicide resistance...

No examination of the role of GE crops in the sustainability of U.S. agriculture is complete with... more No examination of the role of GE crops in the sustainability of U.S. agriculture is complete without understanding what drives academic bioscience. The National Research Council's 2010 report on the role of genetically engineered (GE) crops in U.S. farm sustainability underscores not only their successes, but the challenges they now introduce. The challenges include protecting against herbicide resistance, tracking and controlling water pollution, measuring and guarding against gene flow to non-GE varieties, and attending to such potentially public-good issues as climate change mitigation, minor-crop development, and nitrogen fixation. In the shorter term, successes in these areas will depend on commercial trait development and on the farm management practices linked to it. In the longer term, however, it will depend on the drivers influencing academic bioscience, where most fundamental research underlying genetic modification-and much of the translational work bridging the gap between proof-of-concept and product development-begins. Such drivers increasingly can be understood in supply-and-demand terms because universities increasingly view themselves as suppliers of research deliverables and demanders of research money. On the other side of these two markets, journals, governments, and firms seek research deliverables and public agencies and firms supply research monies. Yet part of the reason most professors work at universities is to pursue noncommercial interests. Predicting

Sociologists define a wicked problem as one without clear causes or solutions, and thus difficult... more Sociologists define a wicked problem as one without clear causes or solutions, and thus difficult or impossible to solve. Herbicide resistance is the epitome of a wicked problem: the causes are convoluted by a myriad of biological and technological factors, and are fundamentally driven by the vagaries of human decision‐making. Weed scientists for decades have conducted research and developed educational programs to prevent or mitigate evolution of herbicide resistance, yet resistance is more prevalent today than ever before. If we expect to achieve success in herbicide resistance management, different approaches will be essential. “Doing something different” in this case is bringing rural sociologists, agricultural economists, weed scientists, and crop consultants together to discuss the decision‐making process itself, community‐based approaches to resistance management, economics of resistance management, potential regulatory and incentive programs, new approaches to educational pr...

Pest Management Science, 2020

BACKGROUND: It has been frequently argued that growers have less incentive to manage the evolutio... more BACKGROUND: It has been frequently argued that growers have less incentive to manage the evolution and spread of herbicide resistant weeds on leased than owned land. This is because resistance management provides long-term rather than short-term benefits that operators may be less assured of capturing on land they do not own. Yet, empirical evidence supporting this argument has been lacking. RESULTS: This study reports on results from a large-scale national survey of weed management and other crop production practices on U.S. agricultural fields. Up to eleven weed management practices were compared across owner-operated versus renter-operated fields. Analysis of survey data from corn and soybean fields did not support the hypothesis that adoption of resistance manage practices is lower on rented acres. In most instances, there were no statistically significant differences in herbicide use or weed management practices on rented versus owned land. This was true at both national and regional levels of analysis. Where there were significant differences, practices associated with greater herbicide resistance management were, as often as not, more prevalent on rented than owned land. CONCLUSIONS: A useful area of future research would be to test for land tenure differences in resistance management using multivariate analysis to control for confounding effects. Unobserved farmer or land characteristics may be confounding results and masking land tenure effects. Results here, however, suggest that these other effects are dominating any obvious disincentive effects of land leasing on resistance management. Of greater concern, the adoption of key resistance management practices was low on both owned and rented land.

Weed Technology, 2018

Seven half-day regional listening sessions were held between December 2016 and April 2017 with gr... more Seven half-day regional listening sessions were held between December 2016 and April 2017 with groups of diverse stakeholders on the issues and potential solutions for herbicide-resistance management. The objective of the listening sessions was to connect with stakeholders and hear their challenges and recommendations for addressing herbicide resistance. The coordinating team hired Strategic Conservation Solutions, LLC, to facilitate all the sessions. They and the coordinating team used in-person meetings, teleconferences, and email to communicate and coordinate the activities leading up to each regional listening session. The agenda was the same across all sessions and included small-group discussions followed by reporting to the full group for discussion. The planning process was the same across all the sessions, although the selection of venue, time of day, and stakeholder participants differed to accommodate the differences among regions. The listening-session format required a ...

F1000 Biology Reports, 2011

Making trade-offs between ecological services and other contributors to human well-being is a dif... more Making trade-offs between ecological services and other contributors to human well-being is a difficult but critical process that requires valuation. This allows both better recognition of the ecological, social, and economic trade-offs and also allows us to bill those who use up or destroy ecological services and reward those that produce or enhance them. It also aids improved ecosystems policy. In this paper we clarify some of the controversies in defining the contributions to human well-being from functioning ecosystems, many of which people are not even aware of. We go on to describe the applicability of the various valuation methods that can be used in estimating the benefits of ecosystem services. Finally, we describe some recent case studies and lay out the research agenda for ecosystem services analysis, modeling, and valuation going forward.

eltonsmithchair.msu.edu

As far as environmental policy is concerned, US agriculture has been something of an anomaly. Whi... more As far as environmental policy is concerned, US agriculture has been something of an anomaly. While most industrial sectors have experienced a succession of environmental policy approaches, the basic policy toward agriculture has changed little since the 1930s. ...

Land Economics, 1988

With the mounting agricultural surpluses and prospects for technological breakthroughs, the searc... more With the mounting agricultural surpluses and prospects for technological breakthroughs, the search for methods to control production is understandable. The concept of long-term cropland retirement resurfaced with vigor during the 1985 farm bill deliberations. Eventually a 45 million acre Conservation Reserve Program (CRP) was authorized. Unlike an earlier long-term land diversion effort known as the Soil Bank (SB), the CRP incorporates soil conservation and environmental goals in addition to supply control. Several factors were instrumental in win-

Journal of soil and water conservation, 1995

Page 1. Technology for production environmental quality: Are opportunities for complem David E. E... more Page 1. Technology for production environmental quality: Are opportunities for complem David E. Ervin and Elisubeth A. Grafi e live in an era of profound techno-logical breakthroughs. High profile W examples affecting agriculture in-...

Agricultural biotechnology has been largely opposed by advocates in the sustainable agriculture m... more Agricultural biotechnology has been largely opposed by advocates in the sustainable agriculture movement, despite claims by the technology’s proponents that it holds the promise to deliver both production (economic) and environmental benefits, two legs of the sustainability stool. We argue in this paper that participants in this polarized debate are talking past each other because assumptions about biotechnology and sustainability remain simplistic and poorly defined. Genetically engineered (GE) herbicide-resistant and insect-resistant crop varieties are the most visible current forms of agricultural biotechnology, and thus the form of biotechnology that many in the sustainability movement react to. However, these crops represent a biotechnology option that has paid insufficient attention to the integrated and systemic requirements of sustainable agriculture. In particular, common definitions of sustainable agriculture reinforce the need to include consideration of socio-economic di...

Southern Economic Journal

bioscience's rising importance for downstream technology and growing private sector relationships... more bioscience's rising importance for downstream technology and growing private sector relationships have evoked substantial policy attention. We contribute to the scrutiny by asking how university bioscientists design and finance their research, with particular attention to the mutuality of research portfolio choice and funding success. The analysis requires consideration of other major influences on academic science, including scientific norms, human capital, and institutional environment. Drawing on a national survey of university bioscientists, we find that public financial support encourages more basic investigation and private support encourages more applied investigation. Yet downstream research is only moderately more excludable than upstream. Once research basicness and other program factors are accounted for, neither the next public nor the next private dollar brings significantly more excludable laboratory discoveries. Public money is attracted to applied and excludable research, and private and public funding crowd each other out at the margin. Professional norms have substantial impacts on the research pursued and financing obtained.