시장보고서
상품코드
1992569

유전자 변형 식품 시장 : 작물 종별, 기술별, 가공도별 - 세계 예측(2026-2032년)

Genetically Modified Foods Market by Crop Type, Technology, By Level of Processing - Global Forecast 2026-2032

발행일: | 리서치사: 구분자 360iResearch | 페이지 정보: 영문 197 Pages | 배송안내 : 1-2일 (영업일 기준)

    
    
    




■ 보고서에 따라 최신 정보로 업데이트하여 보내드립니다. 배송일정은 문의해 주시기 바랍니다.

유전자 변형 식품 시장은 2025년에 1,275억 2,000만 달러로 평가되었습니다. 2026년에는 1,365억 1,000만 달러로 성장하고 CAGR 7.94%를 나타내 2032년까지 2,177억 3,000만 달러에 달할 것으로 예측됩니다.

주요 시장 통계
기준 연도(2025년) 1,275억 2,000만 달러
추정 연도(2026년) 1,365억 1,000만 달러
예측 연도(2032년) 2,177억 3,000만 달러
CAGR(%) 7.94%

과학적 혁신, 이해관계자 간의 역학, 그리고 도입 경로를 형성하는 거버넌스 요인을 프레임워크로 삼아 유전자 변형 식품에 대한 전략적 도입

유전자 변형 식품은 분자생물학의 발전과 수확량 안정성, 투입물 효율화, 영양 강화와 같은 실무적 요구와 연결되는 존재로서 현대 농업에서 점점 더 중심적인 역할을 하고 있습니다. 이 분야를 이해하기 위해서는 형질 설계를 가능하게 하는 과학적 기반, 시장 진입을 중개하는 규제 프레임워크, 그리고 최종적으로 도입의 궤도를 결정하는 이해관계자(농부, 가공업체, 소매업체, 소비자, 규제기관)의 생태계에 주목해야 합니다.

유전자 변형 식품 생태계를 근본적으로 재편하고 있는 새로운 생명공학 기술의 비약적인 발전과 진화하는 규제 및 상업적 역학관계

생명공학 기술의 발전, 변화하는 소비자의 기대치, 그리고 규제 재검토가 맞물려 유전자 변형 식품의 환경은 변혁적인 변화를 맞이하고 있습니다. 유전체 편집의 획기적인 발전은 기술적으로 무엇이 가능한지에 대한 과학적 가정을 바꾸어 놓았고, 개발자들이 기존의 형질전환 방법을 넘어 자연에 존재하는 돌연변이를 모방하는 보다 정밀한 시스제닉 편집과 표적화된 편집으로 전환할 수 있게 했습니다. 그 결과, 개발 일정과 리스크 프로파일이 변화하고, 연구개발 파이프라인과 상업화 전략에 대한 재평가가 요구되고 있습니다.

2025년 미국 관세 조치가 유전자 변형 식품의 무역 흐름, 공급망, 전략적 투자 판단에 미치는 다면적인 누적 영향 평가

2025년 미국의 관세 조치의 누적된 영향은 유전자 변형 식품 가치사슬에 관여하는 기업들에게 무역, 공급망 탄력성 및 상업 전략의 전 영역에 걸쳐 구체적인 변화를 가져왔습니다. 관세 정책의 변화는 종자, 형질, 가공 재료와 같은 투입재에 대한 국경을 초월한 경제 구조를 변화시켰고, 수출업체와 수입업체는 조달 전략과 계약 조건을 재평가하게 되었습니다. 이는 가공업체와 유통업체 전체의 조달 계획과 재고 관리에 영향을 미치고 있습니다.

작물별 니즈와 차별화된 유전자 기술이 도입 경로, 위험 프로파일, 전략적 연구개발의 중점을 어떻게 결정하는지 보여주는 상세한 세분화 분석

세분화에 대한 인사이트는 작물 유형과 유전자 기술 플랫폼에 따라 도입 경로와 리스크가 다르며, 기술적 적합성과 상업적 배경이 어떻게 상호 작용하는지에 대한 인사이트를 제공합니다. 카놀라, 면화, 옥수수, 콩, 사탕무와 같은 작물 유형 관점에서 볼 때, 형질의 우선순위는 각각의 농학 및 가치사슬의 조건을 반영합니다. 예를 들어, 잡초나 해충 피해가 심각한 지역에서는 제초제 저항성이나 해충 저항성이 급속한 보급을 주도하는 반면, 산업 및 영양 목적의 최종 용도와 밀접한 관련이 있는 작물에서는 품질 및 가공용 형질이 주목받고 있습니다.

아메리카, 유럽, 중동 및 아프리카, 아시아태평양의 규제 태도, 상업화 촉진요인 및 이해관계자 우선순위에 대한 지역별 비교 분석

지역별 동향은 유전자 변형 식품 분야의 정책 방향, 상업화 속도, 이해관계자의 우선순위에 강력한 영향을 미치고 있습니다. 미국에서는 확립된 종자 시스템, 계약 구조, 탄탄한 민간 부문의 연구 투자에 힘입어 규제 프레임워크와 상업적 생태계가 대체로 빠른 혁신의 보급을 촉진하고 있습니다. 이러한 환경은 수율의 안정성과 투입재 효율을 다루는 형질의 규모화 중심의 도입을 촉진하고 있습니다.

유전자 변형 식품 분야에서 기업의 궤적과 가치 획득을 결정하는 경쟁적 포지셔닝, 파트너십 생태계 및 혁신 전략에 대한 통찰력 있는 분석

유전자 변형 식품 분야의 기업 차원의 동향은 독자적인 혁신, 전략적 파트너십, 그리고 틈새시장 역량을 활용하는 신규 진입 기업의 조합을 반영하고 있습니다. 주요 생명공학 기업과 종자 기업들은 형질 라이브러리 및 플랫폼 기술에 대한 투자를 지속하고 있으며, 후보 형질의 검증과 시장 진입을 가속화하기 위해 내부 역량을 외부와의 협업을 통해 보완하는 추세가 강화되고 있습니다. 가공업체 및 식품 제조업체와의 협력은 형질 개발을 기능성 및 표시와 관련된 다운스트림 공정의 요구사항과 일치시키는 데 도움이 됩니다.

업계 리더가 포트폴리오를 최적화하고, 이해관계자의 신뢰를 강화하며, 강력한 상업화 경로를 구축할 수 있도록 실행 가능하고 영향력 있는 전략 제안

업계 리더는 기술 선택, 규제 당국과의 관계, 공급망 탄력성 등 다각적인 전략의 균형을 유지하면서 책임감 있게 기회를 포착해야 합니다. 우선, 조직은 포트폴리오를 간소화하고, 명확한 농업 과제와 다운스트림 가공 요구사항에 대응하는 형질에 자원을 집중하는 한편, 규제 환경의 변화에 따라 방향을 전환할 수 있는 유연성을 유지해야 합니다. 이를 통해 개발의 낭비를 줄이고 상용화를 위한 노력에 집중할 수 있습니다.

전문가 인터뷰, 문헌 통합, 삼각 검증 방법, 시나리오 분석을 결합한 투명하고 견고한 조사 방법을 통해 신뢰할 수 있는 조사 결과를 보장합니다.

본 분석의 기초가 되는 조사는 데이터의 완전성, 전문가 검증, 시나리오에 기반한 해석에 중점을 둔 다각적인 방법을 채택했습니다. 주요 정보원으로는 육종, 규제, 공급망 각 분야의 전문가를 대상으로 한 구조화된 인터뷰와 함께 공개된 기술 문헌 및 규제 당국에 제출된 서류를 활용하여 사실에 기반한 주장을 뒷받침했습니다. 2차 자료에서는 과거 사례와 비교 가능한 정책 프레임워크를 통해 전문지식을 보완했습니다.

유전자 변형 식품 생태계 전반의 이해관계자를 대상으로 전략적 전환점, 지속적 위험 및 실행 가능한 기회 영역을 강조하는 간결한 개요

결론에서는 본 분석을 통해 도출된 주요 주제와 전략적 시사점을 통합하고 있습니다. 유전체 편집 및 관련 기법의 과학적 발전으로 형질 개발을 위한 툴킷이 확대되고 있지만, 규제 차이와 변화하는 소비자의 기대치가 복잡한 시장 구조를 만들어내고 있습니다. 기술 혁신과 현실적인 규제 전략, 그리고 탄탄한 공급망 계획이 조화를 이루는 기업만이 과학적 잠재력을 지속가능한 상업적 성과로 전환하는 데 가장 유리한 입장에 서게 될 것입니다.

자주 묻는 질문

  • 유전자 변형 식품 시장 규모는 어떻게 예측되나요?
  • 유전자 변형 식품의 생태계를 재편하는 요인은 무엇인가요?
  • 2025년 미국의 관세 조치가 유전자 변형 식품에 미치는 영향은 무엇인가요?
  • 작물별 유전자 기술의 도입 경로는 어떻게 결정되나요?
  • 유전자 변형 식품 분야의 기업들은 어떤 전략을 취하고 있나요?
  • 업계 리더가 유전자 변형 식품 시장에서 성공하기 위한 전략은 무엇인가요?

목차

제1장 서문

제2장 조사 방법

제3장 주요 요약

제4장 시장 개요

제5장 시장 인사이트

제6장 미국의 관세 누적 영향(2025년)

제7장 AI의 누적 영향(2025년)

제8장 유전자 변형 식품 시장 : 작물 유형별

제9장 유전자 변형 식품 시장 : 기술별

제10장 유전자 변형 식품 시장 : 가공도별

제11장 유전자 변형 식품 시장 : 지역별

제12장 유전자 변형 식품 시장 : 그룹별

제13장 유전자 변형 식품 시장 : 국가별

제14장 미국의 유전자 변형 식품 시장

제15장 중국의 유전자 변형 식품 시장

제16장 경쟁 구도

KTH 26.04.22

The Genetically Modified Foods Market was valued at USD 127.52 billion in 2025 and is projected to grow to USD 136.51 billion in 2026, with a CAGR of 7.94%, reaching USD 217.73 billion by 2032.

KEY MARKET STATISTICS
Base Year [2025] USD 127.52 billion
Estimated Year [2026] USD 136.51 billion
Forecast Year [2032] USD 217.73 billion
CAGR (%) 7.94%

A strategic introduction to genetically modified foods that frames scientific innovation, stakeholder dynamics, and governance factors shaping adoption pathways

Genetically modified foods occupy an increasingly central role in contemporary agriculture, bridging advances in molecular biology with practical imperatives around yield resilience, input efficiency, and nutritional fortification. The introduction to this domain requires attention to the scientific foundations that enable trait design, the regulatory architecture that mediates market entry, and the ecosystem of stakeholders-farmers, processors, retailers, consumers, and regulators-whose decisions ultimately determine adoption trajectories.

Over recent years, public discourse has evolved from binary debates to more nuanced discussion about risk management, traceability, and value capture. Concurrently, scientific progress in precision breeding and gene editing has expanded the palette of achievable traits, shortening development cycles and enabling targeted interventions with reduced off-target effects. Translational pathways from lab to field now require integrated strategies that address biocontainment, regulatory dossiers, and supply chain validation.

Transitioning from scientific promise to commercial reality demands rigorous stakeholder engagement and adaptive governance. Firms must reconcile innovation speed with robust safety assessments, while policymakers balance trade policy, consumer protection, and agricultural competitiveness. Consequently, the introduction sets the stage for understanding not only what technologies are available, but how institutional and market arrangements shape their diffusion and long-term impact.

Emerging biotechnology breakthroughs and evolving regulatory and commercial dynamics that are fundamentally reshaping the genetically modified foods ecosystem

The landscape of genetically modified foods is undergoing transformative shifts driven by converging advances in biotechnology, evolving consumer expectations, and regulatory recalibration. Breakthroughs in genome editing have altered scientific assumptions about what is technically feasible, enabling developers to move beyond traditional transgenic approaches toward more precise cisgenic and targeted edits that mimic naturally occurring variation. As a result, development timelines and risk profiles have shifted, prompting reassessment of R&D pipelines and commercialization strategies.

Simultaneously, policy environments in several jurisdictions are adapting to these technological changes; some regulators are creating differentiated pathways for certain gene-edited products, while others emphasize transparency and traceability. In parallel, supply chain actors are placing greater emphasis on provenance and labeling, reflecting heightened consumer interest in product attributes and production practices. The result is an ecosystem where regulatory nuance and market signals interact to accelerate some technologies while constraining others.

Moreover, strategic partnerships between biotechnology firms, seed companies, and downstream food processors are becoming more integral, as they distribute the technical, regulatory, and commercial risks associated with bringing new traits to market. Taken together, these transformative shifts are reshaping investment priorities, altering competitive dynamics, and creating a more complex terrain for stakeholders to navigate.

Assessing the multifaceted cumulative consequences of United States tariff actions in 2025 on trade flows, supply chains, and strategic investment decisions in genetically modified foods

The cumulative effect of United States tariff measures in 2025 has introduced tangible shifts across trade, supply chain resilience, and commercial strategy for entities engaged in genetically modified food value chains. Tariff policy changes have altered cross-border economics for inputs such as seeds, traits, and processing materials, prompting exporters and importers to re-evaluate sourcing strategies and contractual terms. In turn, this has influenced procurement planning and inventory management across processors and distributors.

Trade policy adjustments have also increased the salience of nearshoring and regional diversification. Firms that previously relied on a small set of supplier geographies began exploring alternative sourcing corridors to reduce exposure to tariff-induced cost volatility. This reorientation has cascading effects on logistics, lead times, and certification regimes, and it requires stronger coordination among breeding programs, seed producers, and commercialization partners.

Additionally, tariff shifts have impacted investment calculus for research and development, particularly for traits and technologies that depend on international collaboration for field trials, germplasm exchange, or regulatory harmonization. Companies have responded by strengthening domestic capabilities, renegotiating licensing agreements, and intensifying regulatory engagement to mitigate compliance risk. As a consequence, operational plans have increasingly factored in trade policy scenarios when assessing product rollout timelines and partnership structures.

Detailed segmentation intelligence illustrating how crop-specific needs and differentiated genetic technologies determine adoption routes, risk profiles, and strategic R&D focus

Segmentation insights reveal differentiated pathways for adoption and risk across crop types and genetic technology platforms, underscoring how technical fit and commercial context interact. When viewed through crop type lenses such as canola, cotton, maize, soybean, and sugar beet, trait prioritization reflects distinct agronomic and value-chain conditions: for example, herbicide tolerance or insect resistance may drive rapid uptake where weed or pest pressure is acute, whereas quality or processing traits gain traction in crops tied closely to industrial or nutritional end-uses.

From a technology perspective, the field now spans cisgenic approaches, genome editing methodologies, RNA interference strategies, and classical transgenic platforms. Each presents distinct development profiles and regulatory considerations. Genome editing and cisgenic methods often offer precision and a perception of reduced regulatory burden in some jurisdictions, while RNA interference enables trait expression modulation without altering protein-coding sequences. Transgenic development remains central for complex trait stacking and for combining herbicide tolerant, insect resistant, and stacked traits into integrated packages that address multiple agronomic challenges simultaneously.

Consequently, commercial strategies must align trait development with crop economics and downstream processing requirements. Companies must also calibrate risk management and communications to reflect technology-specific evidence, as well as the differential regulatory treatments these technologies encounter across markets. In sum, segmentation informs targeted R&D investment and commercialization sequencing that optimizes technical feasibility and market receptivity.

Comparative regional analysis of regulatory stances, commercialization drivers, and stakeholder priorities across the Americas, Europe Middle East & Africa, and Asia-Pacific

Regional dynamics exert powerful influence over policy orientation, commercialization pacing, and stakeholder priorities across the genetically modified foods landscape. In the Americas, regulatory frameworks and commercial ecosystems generally favor rapid innovation diffusion, supported by well-established seed systems, contract structures, and robust private-sector research investments. This environment encourages scale-driven deployments of traits that address yield stability and input efficiency.

By contrast, Europe, Middle East & Africa present a more heterogeneous picture where precautionary principles, diverse regulatory regimes, and public sentiment vary significantly. In some European markets, regulatory conservatism and consumer preference for non-GM labeling constrain certain commercialization pathways, whereas parts of the Middle East and Africa prioritize traits that enhance climate resilience, drought tolerance, and nutritional enhancement to address food security objectives.

Asia-Pacific demonstrates dynamic contrasts as well, with several countries actively enabling biotechnology innovation while others retain restrictive approaches. Rapid agricultural modernization in portions of Asia drives demand for traits that improve input use efficiency and resilience, and regional trade agreements influence harmonization efforts. Across all regions, marketplace actors must navigate distinct regulatory timelines, certification requirements, and consumer expectations to achieve successful market entry and scale.

Insightful analysis of competitive positioning, partnership ecosystems, and innovation strategies that determine company trajectories and value capture in genetically modified foods

Company-level dynamics in genetically modified foods reflect a mix of proprietary innovation, strategic partnerships, and emerging entrants leveraging niche capabilities. Leading biotechnology and seed companies continue to invest in trait libraries and platform technologies, but they increasingly complement internal capabilities with external collaborations to accelerate candidate validation and market access. Alliances with processors and food manufacturers help align trait development with downstream requirements for functionality and labeling.

Smaller firms and specialized technology providers are differentiating through unique technical approaches-such as specific genome editing toolkits or RNA interference constructs-or by focusing on particular crop segments and geographies where regulatory pathways are clearer or where unmet agronomic needs are acute. These firms often act as innovation catalysts, with licensing or joint-venture strategies enabling larger players to integrate novel traits into broader commercialization pipelines.

Investor activity has shifted toward companies that demonstrate both regulatory savvy and supply chain integration capabilities. Firms that can articulate clear stewardship frameworks and traceability solutions tend to attract strategic partners and offtake agreements. Ultimately, company success hinges on the ability to blend scientific credibility with pragmatic commercialization plans that account for regulatory timelines, trade considerations, and end-user acceptance.

Actionable, high-impact strategic recommendations for industry leaders to optimize portfolios, strengthen stakeholder trust, and build resilient commercialization pathways

Industry leaders should adopt a multi-pronged strategy that balances technology choices, regulatory engagement, and supply chain resilience to capture opportunities responsibly. First, organizations must prioritize portfolio rationalization to focus resources on traits that address clear agronomic pain points and downstream processing requirements, while maintaining optionality to pivot as regulatory landscapes evolve. This reduces development churn and concentrates commercial efforts.

Second, proactive regulatory and stakeholder engagement is essential. Firms should invest in transparent safety dossiers, third-party validation, and consumer communications that clarify benefits and mitigation measures. Building trust through evidence-based outreach and stewardship programs will reduce adoption friction and enhance market access. Third, supply chain diversification and nearshoring strategies mitigate exposure to trade policy shifts and logistical bottlenecks; aligning procurement, production, and certification processes with alternative supplier networks will increase resilience.

Finally, industry players should pursue collaborative models that share technical risk while preserving upside potential-structured licensing, co-development agreements, and public-private partnerships can accelerate field validation and de-risk regulatory pathways. By combining focused R&D, stakeholder transparency, and adaptive commercial planning, leaders can navigate complexity and capture sustainable value.

Transparent and robust research methodology combining expert interviews, literature synthesis, triangulation practices, and scenario analysis to ensure credible insights

The research underpinning this analysis used a multi-method approach emphasizing data integrity, expert validation, and scenario-based interpretation. Primary inputs included structured interviews with subject-matter experts across breeding, regulatory, and supply chain disciplines, coupled with publicly available technical literature and regulatory filings to ground factual assertions. Secondary sources supplemented domain knowledge with historical precedent and comparative policy frameworks.

Analytical rigor was maintained through triangulation: independent data streams were cross-checked against expert perspectives to identify convergent themes and to flag areas of uncertainty. Scenario analysis was employed to explore plausible policy and trade permutations, enabling assessment of strategic sensitivity to tariff shifts and regulatory reclassifications. Quality control measures included peer review by domain specialists and iterative refinement of key assumptions to ensure internal consistency.

This methodology supports robust, actionable insights while acknowledging inherent uncertainties in rapidly evolving scientific, regulatory, and trade environments. Transparency about data provenance and analytic choices enables stakeholders to interpret findings within the appropriate context and to adapt recommendations as conditions change.

A concise concluding synthesis highlighting strategic inflection points, persistent risks, and actionable opportunity zones for stakeholders across the GM foods ecosystem

The conclusion synthesizes the principal themes and strategic implications emerging from the analysis. Scientific advances in genome editing and related approaches are expanding the toolkit for trait development, while regulatory divergence and evolving consumer expectations create a complex market topology. Firms that align technical innovation with pragmatic regulatory strategies and robust supply chain planning will be best positioned to convert scientific promise into durable commercial outcomes.

Trade and policy developments, including tariff actions, have underscored the importance of supply chain flexibility and regional diversification. At the same time, segmentation by crop type and technology continues to determine adoption pathways, requiring firms to tailor their approaches by crop economics and end-use requirements. Competitive dynamics favor organizations that combine technical excellence with strong stewardship, transparent communications, and collaborative commercial models.

In closing, stakeholders should treat the current period as one of strategic opportunity and heightened responsibility: the choices made today about technology selection, regulatory engagement, and partnership design will shape the long-term trajectory of genetically modified foods and their contribution to resilient, productive food systems.

Table of Contents

1. Preface

  • 1.1. Objectives of the Study
  • 1.2. Market Definition
  • 1.3. Market Segmentation & Coverage
  • 1.4. Years Considered for the Study
  • 1.5. Currency Considered for the Study
  • 1.6. Language Considered for the Study
  • 1.7. Key Stakeholders

2. Research Methodology

  • 2.1. Introduction
  • 2.2. Research Design
    • 2.2.1. Primary Research
    • 2.2.2. Secondary Research
  • 2.3. Research Framework
    • 2.3.1. Qualitative Analysis
    • 2.3.2. Quantitative Analysis
  • 2.4. Market Size Estimation
    • 2.4.1. Top-Down Approach
    • 2.4.2. Bottom-Up Approach
  • 2.5. Data Triangulation
  • 2.6. Research Outcomes
  • 2.7. Research Assumptions
  • 2.8. Research Limitations

3. Executive Summary

  • 3.1. Introduction
  • 3.2. CXO Perspective
  • 3.3. Market Size & Growth Trends
  • 3.4. Market Share Analysis, 2025
  • 3.5. FPNV Positioning Matrix, 2025
  • 3.6. New Revenue Opportunities
  • 3.7. Next-Generation Business Models
  • 3.8. Industry Roadmap

4. Market Overview

  • 4.1. Introduction
  • 4.2. Industry Ecosystem & Value Chain Analysis
    • 4.2.1. Supply-Side Analysis
    • 4.2.2. Demand-Side Analysis
    • 4.2.3. Stakeholder Analysis
  • 4.3. Porter's Five Forces Analysis
  • 4.4. PESTLE Analysis
  • 4.5. Market Outlook
    • 4.5.1. Near-Term Market Outlook (0-2 Years)
    • 4.5.2. Medium-Term Market Outlook (3-5 Years)
    • 4.5.3. Long-Term Market Outlook (5-10 Years)
  • 4.6. Go-to-Market Strategy

5. Market Insights

  • 5.1. Consumer Insights & End-User Perspective
  • 5.2. Consumer Experience Benchmarking
  • 5.3. Opportunity Mapping
  • 5.4. Distribution Channel Analysis
  • 5.5. Pricing Trend Analysis
  • 5.6. Regulatory Compliance & Standards Framework
  • 5.7. ESG & Sustainability Analysis
  • 5.8. Disruption & Risk Scenarios
  • 5.9. Return on Investment & Cost-Benefit Analysis

6. Cumulative Impact of United States Tariffs 2025

7. Cumulative Impact of Artificial Intelligence 2025

8. Genetically Modified Foods Market, by Crop Type

  • 8.1. Canola
  • 8.2. Cotton
  • 8.3. Maize
  • 8.4. Soybean
  • 8.5. Sugar Beet

9. Genetically Modified Foods Market, by Technology

  • 9.1. Cisgenic
  • 9.2. Genome Editing
  • 9.3. Rna Interference
  • 9.4. Transgenic
    • 9.4.1. Herbicide Tolerant
    • 9.4.2. Insect Resistant
    • 9.4.3. Stacked Traits

10. Genetically Modified Foods Market, by By Level of Processing

  • 10.1. Raw / Fresh Produce
  • 10.2. Packaged Foods
  • 10.3. Animal Feed
  • 10.4. Nutraceutical Foods

11. Genetically Modified Foods Market, by Region

  • 11.1. Americas
    • 11.1.1. North America
    • 11.1.2. Latin America
  • 11.2. Europe, Middle East & Africa
    • 11.2.1. Europe
    • 11.2.2. Middle East
    • 11.2.3. Africa
  • 11.3. Asia-Pacific

12. Genetically Modified Foods Market, by Group

  • 12.1. ASEAN
  • 12.2. GCC
  • 12.3. European Union
  • 12.4. BRICS
  • 12.5. G7
  • 12.6. NATO

13. Genetically Modified Foods Market, by Country

  • 13.1. United States
  • 13.2. Canada
  • 13.3. Mexico
  • 13.4. Brazil
  • 13.5. United Kingdom
  • 13.6. Germany
  • 13.7. France
  • 13.8. Russia
  • 13.9. Italy
  • 13.10. Spain
  • 13.11. China
  • 13.12. India
  • 13.13. Japan
  • 13.14. Australia
  • 13.15. South Korea

14. United States Genetically Modified Foods Market

15. China Genetically Modified Foods Market

16. Competitive Landscape

  • 16.1. Market Concentration Analysis, 2025
    • 16.1.1. Concentration Ratio (CR)
    • 16.1.2. Herfindahl Hirschman Index (HHI)
  • 16.2. Recent Developments & Impact Analysis, 2025
  • 16.3. Product Portfolio Analysis, 2025
  • 16.4. Benchmarking Analysis, 2025
  • 16.5. "
  • 16.6. "Agrivida, Inc. by Novus International
  • 16.7. Advanta Seeds
  • 16.8. Barenbrug Group
  • 16.9. BASF SE
  • 16.10. Bayer AG
  • 16.11. Beijing DaBeiNong Biotechnology Co. Ltd. (DBNBC)
  • 16.12. Bejo Zaden B.V.
  • 16.13. Bioceres S.A.
  • 16.14. Corteva Agriscience
  • 16.15. DLF Seeds A/S
  • 16.16. Fresh Del Monte Produce Incorporated
  • 16.17. J.R. Simplot Co.
  • 16.18. JK Agri Genetics Limited
  • 16.19. KWS Saat SE & Co. KGaA
  • 16.20. Limagrain Group
  • 16.21. Louis Dreyfus Company
  • 16.22. Mahyco Private Limited
  • 16.23. Metahelix Life Sciences Ltd
  • 16.24. Nath Bio-Genes (I) Ltd.
  • 16.25. Rijk Zwaan Zaadteelt en Zaadhandel B.V.
  • 16.26. Sakata Seed Corporation
  • 16.27. Syngenta AG
  • 16.28. Takii & Co., Ltd.
  • 16.29. The Dow Chemical Company
  • 16.30. Vilmorin & Cie SA
샘플 요청 목록
0 건의 상품을 선택 중
목록 보기
전체삭제