IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/cha/ysa001/v3y2010i1p3-37.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Agentenbasierte Abschätzung der Wirtschaft-lichkeit von transgenen Kulturen anhand von Beispielbetrieben in einer Schweizer Ackerbau-region

Author

Listed:
  • Jennifer Schweiger

    (Forschungsanstalt Agroscope Reckenholz-Tänikon ART)

  • Ali Ferjani

    (Forschungsanstalt Agroscope Reckenholz-Tänikon ART)

  • Achim Spiller

    (Georg-August-Universität Göttingen)

Abstract

Sollte der Anbau transgener Kulturen nach Ablauf des Schweizer Gentech-Moratoriums liberalisiert werden, könnte dies für die Schweizer Landwirte eine Option bieten, das landwirtschaftliche Einkommen zu stabilisieren. Aufgrund des kleinstrukturierten Ag-rarraums, dem gesetzlich verankerten Schutz der gentechnikfreien Produktion und dem im Vergleich zu anderen Staaten existieren-den Unterschied in den Kosten und Preisverhältnissen ist eine Abschätzung der Wirtschaftlichkeit einer Nutzung transgener Kul-turen notwendig. Hierzu wurde ein agentenbasiertes Modell kon-struiert, welches die räumlichen Gegebenheiten einer Untersu-chungsregion im Kanton Zürich einbezieht. Unter Annahme eines hohen Schädlingsdrucks zeigen die Modellrechnungen einen wirt-schaftlichen Vorteil insbesondere für Bt-Mais. Wird ein hoher Un-krautdruck vorausgesetzt, ist der Anbau von Ht-Raps, in Kombina-tion mit einer pfluglosen Bodenbearbeitung rentabel. Zudem las-sen sich, aufgrund der räumlichen Bedingungen, starke Variatio-nen in den Koexistenzkosten feststellen, bei denen der Anteil des administrativen Aufwandes hoch ist. Durch die Nutzung transgener Kulturen ist im Modell ein potenzieller Anstieg im Betriebsein-kommen in marginaler Höhe zu erkennen.

Suggested Citation

  • Jennifer Schweiger & Ali Ferjani & Achim Spiller, 2010. "Agentenbasierte Abschätzung der Wirtschaft-lichkeit von transgenen Kulturen anhand von Beispielbetrieben in einer Schweizer Ackerbau-region," Journal of Socio-Economics in Agriculture (Until 2015: Yearbook of Socioeconomics in Agriculture), Swiss Society for Agricultural Economics and Rural Sociology, vol. 3(1), pages 3-37.
    • Handle: RePEc:cha:ysa001:v:3:y:2010:i:1:p:3-37
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://archive.jsagr.org/v3/YSA2010_1_Schweiger_Ferjani_3_37.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Jim Engle-Warnick & Javier Escobal & Sonia Laszlo, 2007. "Ambiguity Aversion as a Predictor of Technology Choice: Experimental Evidence from Peru," CIRANO Working Papers 2007s-01, CIRANO.
    2. Kellermann, Konrad & Balmann, Alfons, 2006. "How Smart Should Farms Be Modeled? Behavioral Foundation of Bidding Strategies in Agent-Based Land Market Models," 2006 Annual Meeting, August 12-18, 2006, Queensland, Australia 25446, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    3. Demont, Matty & Daems, W. & Dillen, Koen & Mathijs, Erik & Sausse, C. & Tollens, Eric, 2008. "Are EU spatial ex ante coexistence regulations proportional?," 2008 International Congress, August 26-29, 2008, Ghent, Belgium 44191, European Association of Agricultural Economists.
    4. Skevas, Theodoros & Wesseler, Justus & Fevereiro, Pedro, 2009. "Coping with ex-ante regulations for planting Bt maize: the Portuguese experience," MPRA Paper 25609, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    5. Demont, Matty & Daems, W. & Dillen, Koen & Mathijs, Erik & Sausse, C. & Tollens, Eric, 2008. "Economics of spatial coexistence of genetically modified and conventional crops: Oilseed rape in Central France," 2008 International Congress, August 26-29, 2008, Ghent, Belgium 43650, European Association of Agricultural Economists.
    6. Demont, Matty & Dillen, Koen & Daems, Wim & Sausse, Christophe & Tollens, Eric & Mathijs, Erik, 2009. "On the proportionality of EU spatial ex ante coexistence regulations," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 34(6), pages 508-518, December.
    7. Volker Beckmann & Claudio Soregaroli & Justus Wesseler, 2006. "Coexistence Rules and Regulations in the European Union," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 88(5), pages 1193-1199.
    8. Soregaroli, Claudio & Wesseler, Justus, 2005. "Minimum Distance Requirements and Liability: Implications for Co-Existence," MPRA Paper 33230, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    9. Mann, Stefan & Mack, Gabriele & Ferjani, Ali, 2003. "Können Produktionsentscheidungen als Investitionsentscheidungen modelliert werden?," German Journal of Agricultural Economics, Humboldt-Universitaet zu Berlin, Department for Agricultural Economics, vol. 52(07), pages 1-9.
    10. Fernandez-Cornejo, Jorge & McBride, William D., 2002. "Adoption Of Bioengineered Crops," Agricultural Economic Reports 33957, United States Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Rolf A. Groeneveld & Erik Ansink & Clemens C.M. Van de Wiel & Justus Wesseler, 2011. "Benefits and Costs of Biologically Contained Genetically Modified Tomatoes and Eggplants in Italy and Spain," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 3(8), pages 1-17, August.
    2. Skevas, Theodoros & Fevereiro, Pedro & Wesseler, Justus, 2010. "Coexistence regulations and agriculture production: A case study of five Bt maize producers in Portugal," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(12), pages 2402-2408, October.
    3. Groeneveld, Rolf A. & Wesseler, Justus & Berentsen, Paul B.M., 2013. "Dominos in the dairy: An analysis of transgenic maize in Dutch dairy farming," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 86(C), pages 107-116.
    4. Breustedt, Gunnar & Latacz-Lohmann, Uwe & Müller-Scheeßel, Jörg, 2013. "Impact of alternative information requirements on the coexistence of genetically modified (GM) and non-GM oilseed rape in the EU," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 93(C), pages 104-115.
    5. Beckmann, Volker & Soregaroli, Claudio & Wesseler, Justus, 2010. "Ex-ante regulation and ex-post liability under uncertainty and irreversibility: governing the coexistence of GM crops," Economics - The Open-Access, Open-Assessment E-Journal (2007-2020), Kiel Institute for the World Economy (IfW Kiel), vol. 4, pages 1-33.
    6. Gray, Emily & Ancev, Tihomir & Drynan, Ross, 2011. "Coexistence of GM and non-GM crops with endogenously determined separation," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(12), pages 2486-2493.
    7. Thomas J. Venus & Koen Dillen & Maarten J. Punt & Justus H. H. Wesseler, 2017. "The Costs of Coexistence Measures for Genetically Modified Maize in Germany," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 68(2), pages 407-426, June.
    8. Areal, Francisco J. & Riesgo, Laura & Gomez-Barbero, Manuel & Rodriguez-Cerezo, Emilio, 2011. "Adoption of GMHT Crops: Coexistence Policy Consequences in the European Union," 2011 International Congress, August 30-September 2, 2011, Zurich, Switzerland 114227, European Association of Agricultural Economists.
    9. Marion Desquilbet & Sylvaine Poret, 2014. "How do GM/non GM coexistence regulations affect markets and welfare?," European Journal of Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 37(1), pages 51-82, February.
    10. Consmuller, Nicola & Beckmann, Volker & Petrick, Martin, 2009. "The Adoption of Bt-Maize - An Econometric Analysis," 2009 Conference, August 16-22, 2009, Beijing, China 51630, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    11. Jonas Kathage & Manuel Gómez-Barbero & Emilio Rodríguez-Cerezo, 2016. "Framework for assessing the socio-economic impacts of Bt maize cultivation," JRC Research Reports JRC103197, Joint Research Centre (Seville site).
    12. Marion Desquilbet & Sylvaine Poret, 2015. "How do GM / non GM coexistence regulations affect markets and welfare?," Working Papers hal-00956039, HAL.
    13. Matty Demont & Yann Devos & Olivier Sanvido, 2010. "Towards Flexible Coexistence Regulations for GM crops in the EU Vers des réglementations flexibles en terme de coexistence pour les cultures transgéniques dans l’Union européenne Hin zu flexiblen Koex," EuroChoices, The Agricultural Economics Society, vol. 9(2), pages 18-24, August.
    14. Fátima Quedas & João Ponte & Carlos Trindade & Maarten Punt & Justus Wesseler, 2016. "Special Issue on GMO Coexistence," EuroChoices, The Agricultural Economics Society, vol. 15(1), pages 59-63, April.
    15. Mattia C. Mancini & Kent Kovacs & Eric Wailes & Jennie Popp, 2016. "Addressing the Externalities from Genetically Modified Pollen Drift on a Heterogeneous Landscape," Land, MDPI, vol. 5(4), pages 1-18, October.
    16. Areal, Francisco J. & Riesgo, Laura & Gómez-Barbero, Manuel & Rodríguez-Cerezo, Emilio, 2012. "Consequences of a coexistence policy on the adoption of GMHT crops in the European Union," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(4), pages 401-411.
    17. Skevas, Theodoros & Wesseler, Justus & Fevereiro, Pedro, 2009. "Coping with ex-ante regulations for planting Bt maize: the Portuguese experience," MPRA Paper 25609, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    18. Skevas, Theodoros & Fevereiro, P. & Wesseler, Justus, 2008. "Coping with ex ante Regulations and ex post Liability Rules for Planting Bt-maize – The Portuguese Experience," 2008 International Congress, August 26-29, 2008, Ghent, Belgium 44189, European Association of Agricultural Economists.
    19. Demont, Matty & Dillen, Koen & Daems, Wim & Sausse, Christophe & Tollens, Eric & Mathijs, Erik, 2009. "On the proportionality of EU spatial ex ante coexistence regulations," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 34(6), pages 508-518, December.
    20. Brick, Kerri & Visser, Martine, 2015. "Risk preferences, technology adoption and insurance uptake: A framed experiment," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 118(C), pages 383-396.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    transgene Kulturen; Schweiz; Koexistenz; Wirtschaftlichkeit;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • Q57 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Environmental Economics - - - Ecological Economics
    • Q18 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Agriculture - - - Agricultural Policy; Food Policy; Animal Welfare Policy

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:cha:ysa001:v:3:y:2010:i:1:p:3-37. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Simon Briner (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://jsagr.org .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.