The growing global demand for food, feed and bio-based renewable material is changing the conditions for agricultural production worldwide. At the same time, revolutionary achievements in the field of biosciences are contributing to a transition whereby bio-based alternatives for energy and materials are becoming more competitive. Creating Sustainable Bioeconomies explores the prospects for biosciences and how its innovation has the potential to help countries in the North (Europe) and the South (Africa) to move towards resource efficient agriculture and sustainable bioeconomies. Throughout the book, the situations of Europe and Sub-Saharan Africa will be compared and contrasted, and opportunities for mutual learning and collaboration are explored. The chapters have been written by high profile authors and deal with a wide range of issues affecting the development of bioeconomies on both continents. This book compares and contrasts the situations of these two regions as they endeavour to develop knowledge based bioeconomies. This volume is suitable for those who are interested in ecological economics, development economics and environmental economics. It also provides action plans assisting policy-makers in both areas to support the transition to knowledge based and sustainable bioeconomies.

From 2006 to mid-2008 the international prices of agricultural commodities increased considerably, by a factor larger than two. This upward trend in agricultural prices captured the world's attention as a new food crisis was emerging. Several explanations for these movements in prices, ranging from demand-driven forces to supply shocks, have been provided by analysts, researchers, and development institutions. This paper is an attempt to empirically validate these explanations using time series econometrics and data at monthly frequency. We focus on the international price of corn, wheat, rice, and soybeans. First, we identify variables associated with the factors mentioned as causing the increase in these agricultural commodities prices. Second, we use time series analysis to try to quantitatively validate those explanations. The empirical work presented here includes first difference models and rolling Granger causality tests. Overall, our empirical analysis mainly provides evidence that financial activity in futures markets and proxies for speculation can help explain the observed change in food prices; any other explanation is not well supported by our time series analysis.

The substantial differences in agricultural productivity between Asia and Africa can be largely explained by differences in use of modern inputs. The evidence suggests that better access to infrastructure (such as roads and irrigation) and agricultural services has given Asian farmers significantly better access to modern inputs, while Sub-Saharan African farmers without such an access are not able to fully exploit the benefits of modern agricultural inputs. This brief discusses the relationship between agricultural service provision and modern input use by farmers in Nigeria, with a focus on the differences among states and local government areas (LGA).

"Anderson, Damania, and Jackson develop a common-agency lobbying model to help understand why North America and the European Union have adopted such different policies toward genetically modified (GM) food. Their results show that when firms (in this case farmers) lobby policymakers to influence standards, and consumers and environmentalists care about the choice of standard, it is possible that increased competition from abroad can lead to strategic incentives to raise standards, not just lower them as shown in earlier models. The authors show that differences in comparative advantage in the adoption of GM crops may be sufficient to explain the trans-Atlantic difference in GM policies. On the one hand, farmers in a country with a comparative advantage in GM technology can gain a strategic cost advantage by lobbying for lax controls on GM production and use at home and abroad. On the other hand, when faced with greater competition, the optimal response of farmers in countries with a comparative disadvantage in GM adoption may be to lobby for more-stringent GM standards. So it is rational for producers in the European Union (whose relatively small farms would enjoy less gains from the new biotechnology than broad-acre American farms) to reject GM technology if that enables them and consumer and environmental lobbyists to argue for restraints on imports from GM-adopting countries. This theoretical proposition is supported by numerical results from a global general equilibrium model of GM adoption in America with and without an EU moratorium. This paper a product of the Trade Team, Development Research Groupis part of a larger effort in the group to understand the economic implications of standards and technology policies in a multilateral trading environment"--World Bank web site.