Labeling, Trade And Genetically Modified Organisms (Gmos): A Proposed Solution
AbstractThe purpose of this brief article is to assess the current controversy over Genetically Modified Organisms (GMOs) in agriculture and its potential implications for the global trading system. More importantly, it offers a solution to the serious potential for injury to this system, to be developed below. The remainder of this article is divided into three sections. The next section will discuss labeling of GMO agricultural products, distinguishing between issues of food products and those affecting seed. Next, it will argue in favor of a particular type of "negative" label ("this product contains no GMOs") as distinct from a "positive" label ("this product may contain GMOs"). This proposal draws on the U.S. experience in the dairy sector with milk from cows treated with recombinant bovine somatotropin, or rBST. Finally, it concludes with a discussion of issues which are left unresolved by the labeling proposal, and some of the remaining challenges posed by GMOs for the global food and agricultural system.
Download InfoIf 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.
Bibliographic InfoPaper provided by University of Minnesota, Center for International Food and Agricultural Policy in its series Working Papers with number 14402.
Date of creation: 1999
Date of revision:
Contact details of provider:
Postal: 332 Classroom Office Bldg, 1994 Buford Avenue, St. Paul, MN 55108-6040
Phone: (612) 625-8713
Fax: (612) 625-6245
Web page: http://www.cifap.umn.edu/
More information through EDIRC
International Relations/Trade; Research and Development/Tech Change/Emerging Technologies;
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.:
- William DOBSON, 1996. "The Bst Case," Staff Papers 397, University of Wisconsin Madison, AAE.
- William D. Dobson, 1996. "The BST Case," Wisconsin-Madison Agricultural and Applied Economics Staff Papers 397, Wisconsin-Madison Agricultural and Applied Economics Department.
- Aldrich, Lorna M. & Blisard, Noel, 1998. "Consumer Acceptance of Biotechnology: Lessons From the rbST Experience," Agricultural Information Bulletins 33663, United States Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service.
- Rausser, Gordon C. & Scotchmer, Suzanne & Simon, Leo K., 1999. "Intellectual Property and Market Structure in Agriculture," Department of Agricultural & Resource Economics, UC Berkeley, Working Paper Series qt70j206tr, Department of Agricultural & Resource Economics, UC Berkeley.
- Jose B. Falck-Zepeda & Greg Traxler & Robert G. Nelson, 2000. "Rent creation and distribution from biotechnology innovations: The case of bt cotton and Herbicide-Tolerant soybeans in 1997," Agribusiness, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 16(1), pages 21-32.
- Hyde, Jeffrey & Martin, Marshall A. & Preckel, Paul V. & Dobbins, Craig L. & Edwards, C. Richard, 1999. "The Economics Of Refuge Design For Bt Corn," 1999 Annual meeting, August 8-11, Nashville, TN 21519, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
- Traxler, Greg & Falck-Zepeda, Jose Benjamin & Sain, Gustavo, 2000. "Genes, Germplasm And Developing Country Access To Genetically Modified Crop Varieties," Proceedings:Transitions in Agbiotech: Economics of Strategy and Policy, June 24-25, 1999, Washington, D.C. 25997, Regional Research Project NE-165 Private Strategies, Public Policies, and Food System Performance.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (AgEcon Search).
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.