Advanced Search
MyIDEAS: Login

Lessons from the California GM Labeling Proposition on the State of Crop Biotechnology

Contents:

Author Info

  • Zilberman, David
  • Kaplan, Scott
  • Kim, Eunice
  • Waterfield, Gina

Abstract

No abstract is available for this item.

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://purl.umn.edu/149851
Download Restriction: no

Bibliographic Info

Paper provided by Agricultural and Applied Economics Association in its series 2013 Annual Meeting, August 4-6, 2013, Washington, D.C. with number 149851.

as in new window
Length:
Date of creation: 2013
Date of revision:
Handle: RePEc:ags:aaea13:149851

Contact details of provider:
Postal: 555 East Wells Street, Suite 1100, Milwaukee, Wisconsin 53202
Phone: (414) 918-3190
Fax: (414) 276-3349
Email:
Web page: http://www.aaea.org
More information through EDIRC

Related research

Keywords: Biotechnology; Labeling; Proposition 37; GMO; Voting; Agricultural and Food Policy; Consumer/Household Economics; Crop Production/Industries; Demand and Price Analysis; Environmental Economics and Policy; Food Consumption/Nutrition/Food Safety; Food Security and Poverty; Institutional and Behavioral Economics; Land Economics/Use; Political Economy; Research and Development/Tech Change/Emerging Technologies; Risk and Uncertainty;

This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

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. Matin Qaim & Alain de Janvry, 2003. "Genetically Modified Crops, Corporate Pricing Strategies, and Farmers' Adoption: The Case of Bt Cotton in Argentina," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 85(4), pages 814-828.
  2. Hamilton, Stephen F. & Sunding, David L. & Zilberman, David, 2003. "Public goods and the value of product quality regulations: the case of food safety," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 87(3-4), pages 799-817, March.
  3. Colson, Gregory & Rousu, Matthew C. & Huffman, Wallace E., 2008. "Consumers' Willingness to Pay for New Genetically Modified Food Products: Evidence from Experimental Auctions of Intragenic and Transgenic Foods," 2008 Annual Meeting, July 27-29, 2008, Orlando, Florida 6407, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
  4. Huffman, Wallace & Shogren, J. E. & Rousu, M. & Tegene, Abebayehu, 2003. "Consumer Willingness to Pay for Genetically Modified Food Labels in a Market with Diverse Information: Evidence from Experimental Auctions," Staff General Research Papers 12256, Iowa State University, Department of Economics.
  5. Heiman, Amir & Just, David R. & Zilberman, David, 2000. "The Role Of Socioeconomic Factors And Lifestyle Variables In Attitude And The Demand For Genetically Modified Foods," Journal of Agribusiness, Agricultural Economics Association of Georgia, vol. 18(3).
  6. Anthony Downs, 1957. "An Economic Theory of Political Action in a Democracy," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 65, pages 135.
  7. Jayson L. Lusk & Keith H. Coble, 2005. "Risk Perceptions, Risk Preference, and Acceptance of Risky Food," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 87(2), pages 393-405.
  8. Lusk, Jayson L. & Jamal, Mustafa & Kurlander, Lauren & Roucan, Maud & Taulman, Lesley, 2005. "A Meta-Analysis of Genetically Modified Food Valuation Studies," Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Western Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 30(01), April.
  9. Aerni, Philipp & Scholderer, Joachim & Ermen, David, 2011. "How would Swiss consumers decide if they had freedom of choice? Evidence from a field study with organic, conventional and GM corn bread," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(6), pages 830-838.
Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

Citations

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:ags:aaea13:149851. 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: (AgEcon Search).

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.