IDEAS home Printed from
MyIDEAS: Login to save this article or follow this journal

Is it Cost Effective to Segregate Canola in WA?

  • Crowe, Bronwyn
  • Pluske, Johanna M.
Registered author(s):

    If genetically modified (GM) canola varieties are to be released for commercial cultivation in Australia, the Australian canola supply chain would have to consider segregation options if it wishes to continue marketing non-GM canola and comply with worldwide labelling requirements. The feasibility of segregation and cost effectiveness of three possible segregation methods is investigated in this paper. In considering each of these methods the increase in total grain handling cost due to segregation is expected to be between 5 and 9 per cent. Such an increase is comparable with segregation costs reported in Canadian literature.

    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:
    Download Restriction: no

    Article provided by University of Melbourne, Melbourne School of Land and Environment in its journal Australasian Agribusiness Review.

    Volume (Year): 14 (2006)
    Issue (Month): ()

    in new window

    Handle: RePEc:ags:auagre:126102
    Contact details of provider: Web page:

    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. William W. Wilson & Bruce L. Dahl, 2005. "Costs and Risks of Testing and Segregating Genetically Modified Wheat," Review of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 27(2), pages 212-228.
    2. 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," Center for Agricultural and Rural Development (CARD) Publications 05-wp411, Center for Agricultural and Rural Development (CARD) at Iowa State University.
    3. 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.
    4. Susan Stone & ; Anna Matysek & ; Andrew Dolling, 2003. "Modelling Possible Impacts of GM Crops on Australian Trade," Urban/Regional 0304002, EconWPA.
    5. James, Sallie & Burton, Michael P., 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), December.
    6. Kym Anderson & Lee Ann Jackson, 2005. "GM crop technology and trade restraints: economic implications for Australia and New Zealand ," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 49(3), pages 263-281, 09.
    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. Smyth, Stuart J. & Phillips, Peter W.B., 2001. "Competitors Co-Operating: Establishing A Supply Chain To Manage Genetically Modified Canola," International Food and Agribusiness Management Review, International Food and Agribusiness Management Association (IFAMA), vol. 4(01).
    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:auagre:126102. 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.