the environment could lead to greater public acceptance of transgenic approaches and ultimately to a rationalization of regulatory regimes across countries, traits and crops. This in turn could mean that the costs (monetary and temporal) of transgenic research, development and deployment could fall significantly, leading to the rapid growth in the num­ber of transgenic events and their pace of adoption. New biotechnological discoveries and their successful applica­tion in a country like China, where experimentation and investment in crop biotechnology continue, may lead other countries to follow suit. Finally, the concern about climate change and increasing energy prices could lead to significant investment in the development of biofuels, which, in turn, would increase rapidly growing resource scarcity and possi­bly higher food prices. Higher food scarcity, in turn, would increase the value of improved agricultural productivity and may lead countries to reassess the regulations restricting the growth of biotechnology. Furthermore, the development of biofuel crops may also rely on transgenic varieties and lead to enhancement of agricultural biotechnology and increase their acceptance.

    Under such an alternative pathway, oilseeds with im­proved lipid profiles and staple grains with vitamin and mineral fortification could be introduced, and three major transgenic food crops that are already on the brink of ap­proval (Bt rice, herbicide tolerant wheat and nutrient re­inforced rice) could expand in developing countries and industrial countries alike. Furthermore, such a pathway could see traits for the remediation of polluted or degraded land or adaptation to heat and drought, which could assist in dealing with current agroenvironmental challenges and in the adaptation to rapid climate change.

5.5.4.3 Alternative pathways—less biotechnology

If society determines that the risks associated with trans-genesis in agriculture exceed the benefits, the tool might be abandoned over the next several decades. Agricultural improvement research would continue, however, as it must to meet current and future challenges. Other research tools would be used more intensively, including conventional and mutagenic breeding. Non-transgenic molecular tools would also be used, such as marker assisted breeding. Under this alternative pathway, it is likely that a wider range of genetic variation would be sought within crops and wild relatives, and molecular tools would facilitate this search.

     In industrial countries, more than half of all agricul­tural research expenditures are currently made by the pri­vate sector. Much of that research is aimed at developing patentable genetic constructs for use in crop and livestock improvement through transgenesis. The overall level of agri­cultural research expenditures in industrial countries could be reduced substantially if transgenic tools were abandoned, unless firms could assert binding intellectual property rights over discovered traits. At the same time, the costs associ­ated with the regulation of transgenic crops would also be avoided. Overall, it is likely that the elimination of a power­ful tool like transgenesis would slow but not stop the pace of agricultural research and improvement. As a result, human­ity would likely be more vulnerable to climatic and other shocks and to increased natural resource scarcity under this alternative pathway.

5.5.4.4 Implications for the agricultural sector

For new technologies to be pro-poor, they need to relate to crops consumed by subsistence and small-scale farmers, allow for small-scale cultivation practices, and they need to be adapted to the human, physical, financial and social capital of the rural poor. Economic impacts tend to be more pro-poor where significant market competition exists in the supply of new technologies. The increased supply, as well as enhanced quality of improved technologies could contribute to reduced food prices, providing extra benefits to the urban poor. Improved food productivity can also be an important force to counter increased energy prices that are likely to contribute to increased food prices, which have a dispropor­tionate negative effect on the poor.

5.5.4.5 Implications for biodiversity

The impacts of a rapid expansion of transgenic crops on natural and agricultural biodiversity over the next 50 years could be significant and will depend in part on how regula­tory regimes evolve. Natural biodiversity could be affected through crop yields and the implications of transgenic crops for land use, potential outcrossing of transgenic material to related crop and wild species, and direct and indirect effects on non-target species. Agricultural biodiversity could be af­fected indirectly, much as it was by the spread of modern green revolution varieties, as well as directly through the use of the technology.

     The most direct way transgenic crops could affect natu­ral biodiversity is through their effect on crop yields and associated pressures influencing land use. To the extent that transgenic innovations support yield growth (or reduce crop losses to pests and diseases), they could alleviate pressure to expand crop production into currently uncultivated areas, endangering the natural biodiversity that exists there.

    The potential for outcrossing to wild or agricultural relatives varies by crop. Transgenic varieties of crops that have a high propensity to outcross typically have not been approved for cultivation in areas where wild relatives are endemic. Most crop species, whether transgenic or not, are unlikely to be able to reproduce and persist in the wild, and management strategies can be used to minimize the risk (FAO, 2004). The potential for transgenic crop varieties to cross with conventional varieties clearly exists, although transgenic traits that do not confer a competitive advan­tage are unlikely to persist in farmers' fields unless they are specifically selected. Outcrossing to wild or cultivated rela­tives could be prevented by the use of genetic use restric­tion technologies, but this approach is controversial and has not been developed commercially. Whether the existence of an otherwise benign transgenic trait in an agricultural crop constitutes a meaningful loss of biodiversity is a matter of debate, particularly if it is a trait farmers have selected for (Raney and Pingali, 2005).

     Whether modern variety adoption necessarily reduces agricultural biodiversity is a matter of debate. Agricultural biodiversity is important because it influences the resilience of crop ecosystems and maintains a "library" of genetic resources for current and future breeding activities. The domestication of wild plants into landraces narrowed the genetic base for these crops as farmers selected among the full range of plant types for those that produced more desir-