Advanced Search
MyIDEAS: Login

Governing uncertain and unknown effects of genetically modified crops

Contents:

Author Info

  • Kvakkestad, Valborg
  • Vatn, Arild
Registered author(s):

    Abstract

    This paper analyzes the capabilities of three different governance regimes for adequately handling uncertain and unknown effects of genetically modified (GM) crops. Adequate handling requires the development of sound procedures for identification of uncertainty and ignorance (U&I), reduction of U&I, decisions on how to treat irreducible U&I and monitoring of unexpected effects. The nature of U&I implies, however, that these procedures will be highly incomplete. Governance mechanisms that facilitate cooperative adaptation and communicative rationality are therefore needed. The three governance regimes (GRs) compared are: GM-crops are produced by private firms and these firms are made liable for harm (GR1); GM-crops are produced by private firms and the government decides whether the crops should be marketed (GR2); and GM-crops are produced and the government decides whether the crops should be marketed (GR3). The effect of bringing the civil society into the decision-making process is also analyzed. GR3 will be stronger in cooperative adaptation and communicative rationality than GR2. Public research organizations have fewer conflicts of interest with the government than private firms, and academic norms are important. Difficulties in proving harm and identifying the responsible firm will make GR1 weak in cooperative adaptation and communicative rationality.

    Download Info

    If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/B6VDY-51D4JYY-9/2/4396d0aa6a13dce1f16564b0b88ac840
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.

    Bibliographic Info

    Article provided by Elsevier in its journal Ecological Economics.

    Volume (Year): 70 (2011)
    Issue (Month): 3 (January)
    Pages: 524-532

    as in new window
    Handle: RePEc:eee:ecolec:v:70:y:2011:i:3:p:524-532

    Contact details of provider:
    Web page: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/ecolecon

    Related research

    Keywords: GM-crops Institutions Uncertainty Ignorance Cooperative adaptation Communicative rationality;

    References

    References listed on IDEAS
    Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
    as in new window
    1. Zweifel, Peter & Tyran, Jean-Robert, 1994. "Environmental impairment liability as an instrument of environmental policy," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 11(1), pages 43-56, September.
    2. Farber, Stephen, 1991. "Regulatory schemes and self-protective environmental risk control: a comparison of insurance, liability, and deposit/refund systems," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 3(3), pages 231-245, September.
    3. Feess, E. & Hege, U., 2000. "Environmental harm and financial responsibility," Open Access publications from Tilburg University urn:nbn:nl:ui:12-85388, Tilburg University.
    4. Clapp, Jennifer, 2008. "Illegal GMO releases and corporate responsibility: Questioning the effectiveness of voluntary measures," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 66(2-3), pages 348-358, June.
    5. Vatn, Arild, 2009. "An institutional analysis of methods for environmental appraisal," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 68(8-9), pages 2207-2215, June.
    6. Wolf, Charles, Jr, 1979. "A Theory of Nonmarket Failure: Framework for Implementation Analysis," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 22(1), pages 107-39, April.
    7. Merrifield, John, 2002. "A general equilibrium analysis of the insurance bonding approach to pollution threats," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 40(1), pages 103-115, January.
    8. Michael A. Toman, 1994. "Economics and "Sustainability": Balancing Trade-Offs and Imperatives," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 70(4), pages 399-413.
    9. Eberhard Feess & Ulrich Hege, 2000. "Environmental Harm and Financial Responsibility*," The Geneva Papers on Risk and Insurance - Issues and Practice, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 25(2), pages 220-234, April.
    10. Williamson, Oliver E, 1999. "Public and Private Bureaucracies: A Transaction Cost Economics Perspective," Journal of Law, Economics and Organization, Oxford University Press, vol. 15(1), pages 306-42, April.
    11. Andrew Stirling, 1998. "Risk at a turning point?," Journal of Risk Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 1(2), pages 97-109, April.
    12. Hutchinson, Emma & van 't Veld, Klaas, 2005. "Extended liability for environmental accidents: what you see is what you get," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 49(1), pages 157-173, January.
    13. Eberhard Feess & Gerd Muehlheusser & Ansgar Wohlschlegel, 2009. "Environmental liability under uncertain causation," European Journal of Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 28(2), pages 133-148, October.
    14. Peter Newell, 2003. "Globalization and the Governance of Biotechnology," Global Environmental Politics, MIT Press, vol. 3(2), pages 56-71, 05.
    15. Valborg Kvakkestad & Arild Vatn, 2008. "Regulating the release of GMOs: contrasts between the European Union and Norway," Environment and Planning C: Government and Policy, Pion Ltd, London, vol. 26(5), pages 968-981, October.
    16. Ulph, Alistair & Valentini, Laura, 2004. "Environmental liability and the capital structure of firms," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 26(4), pages 393-410, December.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as in new window

    Cited by:
    1. Kouser, Shahzad & Qaim, Matin, 2011. "Impact of Bt cotton on pesticide poisoning in smallholder agriculture: A panel data analysis," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(11), pages 2105-2113, September.

    Lists

    This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:ecolec:v:70:y:2011:i:3:p:524-532. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Zhang, Lei).

    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 references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

    If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link 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 profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

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