IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/
MyIDEAS: Login to save this article or follow this journal

GM crop technology and trade restraints: economic implications for Australia and New Zealand

  • Anderson, Kym
  • Jackson, Lee Ann

How much might the potential economic benefit from enhanced farm productivity associated with crop biotechnology adoption by Australia and New Zealand (ANZ) be offset by a loss of market access abroad for crops that may contain genetically modified (GM) organisms? This paper uses the Global Trade Analysis Project (GTAP) model to estimate effects of other countries’ GM policies without and with ANZ farmers adopting GM varieties of various grains and oilseeds. The gross economic benefits to ANZ from adopting GM crops under a variety of scenarios could be positive even if the strict controls on imports from GM-adopting countries by the European Union are maintained, but not if North-East Asia also applied such trade restaints. From those gross economic effects would need to be subtracted society’s evaluation of any new food safety concerns and negative environmental externalities (net of any new environmental and occupational health benefits), as well as any extra costs of segregation, identity preservation and consumer search.

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/118502
Download Restriction: no

Article provided by Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society in its journal Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics.

Volume (Year): 49 (2005)
Issue (Month): 3 (September)
Pages:

as
in new window

Handle: RePEc:ags:aareaj:118502
Contact details of provider: Postal: AARES Central Office Manager, Crawford School of Public Policy, ANU, Canberra ACT 0200
Phone: 0409 032 338
Web page: http://www.aares.info
Email:


More information through EDIRC

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. 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.
  2. Lapan, Harvey E. & Moschini, GianCarlo, 2004. "Innovation and Trade with Endogenous Market Failure: The Case of Genetically Modified Products," Staff General Research Papers 2109, Iowa State University, Department of Economics.
  3. Susan Stone & ; Anna Matysek & ; Andrew Dolling, 2003. "Modelling Possible Impacts of GM Crops on Australian Trade," Urban/Regional 0304002, EconWPA.
  4. Sallie James & Michael Burton, 2003. "Consumer preferences for GM food and other attributes of the food system," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 47(4), pages 501-518, December.
  5. Wilson, William W. & Dahl, Bruce L., 2002. "Costs And Risks Of Testing And Segregating Gm Wheat," Agribusiness & Applied Economics Report 23480, North Dakota State University, Department of Agribusiness and Applied Economics.
  6. Chantal Nielsen & Kym Anderson, 2001. "Global market effects of alternative European responses to genetically modified organisms," Review of World Economics (Weltwirtschaftliches Archiv), Springer, vol. 137(2), pages 320-346, June.
  7. 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.
Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

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

When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ags:aareaj:118502. 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.

This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis using RePEc data.