Advanced Search
MyIDEAS: Login

Labeling Regulations and Segregation of First- and Second-Generation Genetically Modified Products: Innovation Incentives and Welfare Effects

Contents:

Author Info

Abstract

We review some of the most significant issues and results on the economic effects of genetically modified (GM) product innovation, with emphasis on the question of GM labeling and the need for costly segregation and identity preservation activities. The analysis is organized around an explicit model that can accommodate the features of both first-generation and second-generation GM products. The model accounts for the proprietary nature of GM innovations and for the critical role of consumer preferences vis-Ã -vis GM products, as well as for the impacts of segregation and identity preservation and the effects of a mandatory GM labeling regulation. We also investigate briefly a novel question in this setting, the choice of "research direction" when both cost-reducing and quality-enhancing GM innovations are feasible.

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.card.iastate.edu/publications/DBS/PDFFiles/05wp391.pdf
File Function: Full Text
Download Restriction: no

File URL: http://www.card.iastate.edu/publications/synopsis.aspx?id=585
File Function: Online Synopsis
Download Restriction: no

Bibliographic Info

Paper provided by Center for Agricultural and Rural Development (CARD) at Iowa State University in its series Center for Agricultural and Rural Development (CARD) Publications with number 05-wp391.

as in new window
Length:
Date of creation: Apr 2005
Date of revision:
Handle: RePEc:ias:cpaper:05-wp391

Contact details of provider:
Postal: 578 Heady Hall, Ames, Iowa 50011-1070
Phone: (515) 294-1183
Fax: (515) 294-6336
Email:
Web page: http://www.card.iastate.edu/
More information through EDIRC

Related research

Keywords: identity preservation; labeling; market failure; product differentiation; welfare.;

Other versions of this item:

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. Golan, Elise H. & Kuchler, Fred & Mitchell, Lorraine, 2000. "Economics Of Food Labeling," Agricultural Economics Reports 34069, United States Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service.
  2. Harvey E. Lapan & Giancarlo Moschini, 2004. "Innovation and Trade with Endogenous Market Failure: The Case of Genetically Modified Products," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 86(3), pages 634-648.
  3. Moschini, GianCarlo & Lapan, Harvey E. & Sobolevsky, Andrei, 2000. "Roundup Ready Soybeans and Welfare Effects in the Soybean Complex," Staff General Research Papers 1799, Iowa State University, Department of Economics.
  4. Moschini, GianCarlo & Lapan, Harvey E., 1999. "Intellectual Property Rights and the Welfare Effects of Agricultural R&D," Staff General Research Papers 1735, Iowa State University, Department of Economics.
  5. Mussa, Michael & Rosen, Sherwin, 1978. "Monopoly and product quality," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 18(2), pages 301-317, August.
  6. Akerlof, George A, 1970. "The Market for 'Lemons': Quality Uncertainty and the Market Mechanism," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, MIT Press, vol. 84(3), pages 488-500, August.
  7. Bullock, D. S. & Desquilbet, M., 2002. "The economics of non-GMO segregation and identity preservation," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 27(1), pages 81-99, February.
  8. Grossman, Sanford J, 1981. "The Informational Role of Warranties and Private Disclosure about Product Quality," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 24(3), pages 461-83, December.
  9. W. H. Furtan & R. S. Gray & J. J. Holzman, 2003. "The Optimal Time to License a Biotech "Lemon"," Contemporary Economic Policy, Western Economic Association International, vol. 21(4), pages 433-444, October.
  10. José Benjamin Falck-Zepeda & Greg Traxler & Robert G. Nelson, 2000. "Surplus Distribution from the Introduction of a Biotechnology Innovation," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 82(2), pages 360-369.
  11. Charles Noussair & StÈphane Robin & Bernard Ruffieux, 2004. "Do Consumers Really Refuse To Buy Genetically Modified Food?," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 114(492), pages 102-120, 01.
  12. Huffman, Wallace E. & Shogren, Jason F. & Rousu, Matthew C. & Tegene, Abebayehu, 2003. "Consumer Willingness to Pay for Genetically Modified Food Labels in a Market with Diverse Information: Evidence from Experimental Auctions," Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Western Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 28(03), December.
  13. Carter, Colin A. & Gruere, Guillaume P., 2003. "International Approaches to the Labeling of Genetically Modified Foods," Choices, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 18(2).
  14. Ian M. Sheldon, 2002. "Regulation of biotechnology: will we ever 'freely' trade GMOs?," European Review of Agricultural Economics, Foundation for the European Review of Agricultural Economics, vol. 29(1), pages 155-176, March.
  15. Andrei Sobolevsky & GianCarlo Moschini & Harvey Lapan, 2005. "Genetically Modified Crops and Product Differentiation: Trade and Welfare Effects in the Soybean Complex," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 87(3), pages 621-644.
  16. Murray Fulton & Konstantinos Giannakas, 2004. "Inserting GM Products into the Food Chain: The Market and Welfare Effects of Different Labeling and Regulatory Regimes," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 86(1), pages 42-60.
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. GianCarlo Moschini & Harun Bulut & Luigi Cembalo, 2005. "On the Segregation of Genetically Modified, Conventional and Organic Products in European Agriculture: A Multi-market Equilibrium Analysis," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 56(3), pages 347-372.
  2. Moschini, GianCarlo, 2008. "Biotechnology and the Development of Food Markets: Retrospect and Prospects," Staff General Research Papers 12982, Iowa State University, Department of Economics.

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:ias:cpaper:05-wp391. 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: ().

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.