IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/canjag/v56y2008i4p533-553.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

European Sugar Policy Reform and Agricultural Innovation

Author

Listed:
  • Koen Dillen
  • Matty Demont
  • Eric Tollens

Abstract

In July 2006, the European Union's (EU) Common Market Organization (CMO) for sugar underwent the first radical reform since its establishment in 1968. In this article, we study the incentives for adoption of new technologies before and after the policy reform. We build a stochastic partial equilibrium model and use it to analyze the effect of the policy reform on the adoption incentives of genetically modified herbicide tolerant sugar beet. Our findings show that the adoption incentives of high‐cost sugar beet farmers are significantly reduced under the new CMO. Medium‐cost producers, in contrast, have greater incentives to adopt new technologies, while low‐cost producers are largely left unaffected. The reduced adoption incentives of high‐cost farmers lead to lower flexibility and competitiveness of these farmers and therefore coincides with the goals of the reform to crowd out high‐cost producers and increase competitiveness of the European sugar market. En juillet 2006, l'Organisation commune du marché (OCM) du sucre a subi sa première réforme radicale depuis sa mise en place par l'UE en 1968. Dans la présente étude, nous avons examiné les incitatifs offerts pour l'adoption de nouvelles technologies, avant et après la réforme. Nous avons élaboré un modèle stochastique d'équilibre partiel et l'avons utilisé pour analyser les répercussions de la réforme sur les incitatifs offerts pour l'adoption de variétés de betteraves sucrières génétiquement modifiées résistantes aux herbicides. Selon nos résultats, les incitatifs offerts aux producteurs de betterave sucrière ayant des coûts marginaux élevés ont significativement diminué depuis la réforme de l'OCM du sucre. Par contre, les incitatifs offerts aux producteurs ayant des coûts marginaux moyens se sont accrus, tandis que ceux offerts aux producteurs ayant de faibles coûts marginaux n'ont pas changé. La diminution des incitatifs offerts aux producteurs ayant des coûts marginaux élevés entraîne une diminution de la souplesse et de la capacité concurrentielle de ces producteurs et, par conséquent, coïncide avec les objectifs de la réforme qui visent àévincer les producteurs ayant des coûts marginaux élevés et à accroître la capacité concurrentielle du marché européen du sucre.

Suggested Citation

  • Koen Dillen & Matty Demont & Eric Tollens, 2008. "European Sugar Policy Reform and Agricultural Innovation," Canadian Journal of Agricultural Economics/Revue canadienne d'agroeconomie, Canadian Agricultural Economics Society/Societe canadienne d'agroeconomie, vol. 56(4), pages 533-553, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:bla:canjag:v:56:y:2008:i:4:p:533-553
    DOI: 10.1111/j.1744-7976.2008.00146.x
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1744-7976.2008.00146.x
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/j.1744-7976.2008.00146.x?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. S¯ren E. Frandsen & Hans G. Jensen & Wusheng Yu & Aage Walter-J¯rgensen, 2003. "Reform of EU sugar policy: price cuts versus quota reductions," European Review of Agricultural Economics, Oxford University Press and the European Agricultural and Applied Economics Publications Foundation, vol. 30(1), pages 1-26, March.
    2. Alexandre Gohin & Jean-Christophe Bureau, 2006. "Modelling the EU sugar supply to assess sectoral policy reforms," European Review of Agricultural Economics, Oxford University Press and the European Agricultural and Applied Economics Publications Foundation, vol. 33(2), pages 223-247, June.
    3. Giancarlo Moschini & Harvey Lapan, 1997. "Intellectual Property Rights and the Welfare Effects of Agricultural R&D," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 79(4), pages 1229-1242.
    4. Giancarlo Moschini & Harvey Lapan & Andrei Sobolevsky, 2000. "Roundup ready® soybeans and welfare effects in the soybean complex," Agribusiness, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 16(1), pages 33-55.
    5. William Griffiths & Xueyan Zhao, 2000. "A Unified Approach to Sensitivity Analysis in Equilibrium Displacement Models: Comment," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 82(1), pages 236-240.
    6. Devadoss, Stephen & Kropf, Jurgen, 1996. "Impacts of trade liberalizations under the Uruguay round on the world sugar market," Agricultural Economics, Blackwell, vol. 15(2), pages 83-96, November.
    7. Nolte, Stephan, 2008. "The Future Of The World Sugar Market--A Spatial Price Equilibrium Analysis," 107th Seminar, January 30-February 1, 2008, Sevilla, Spain 6663, European Association of Agricultural Economists.
    8. Cheryl S. DeVuyst & Cheryl J. Wachenheim, 2005. "American Crystal Sugar: Genetically Enhanced Sugarbeets?," Review of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 27(1), pages 105-116.
    9. Peter Bogetoft & Kristoffer Boye & Henrik Neergaard-Petersen & Kurt Nielsen, 2007. "Reallocating sugar beet contracts: can sugar production survive in Denmark?," European Review of Agricultural Economics, Oxford University Press and the European Agricultural and Applied Economics Publications Foundation, vol. 34(1), pages 1-20, March.
    10. 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.
    11. Dillen, Koen & Demont, Matty & Tollens, Eric, 2008. "Modelling heterogeneity to estimate the ex ante value of biotechnology innovations," 2008 International Congress, August 26-29, 2008, Ghent, Belgium 43945, European Association of Agricultural Economists.
    12. Jeroen Buysse & Bruno Fernagut & Olivier Harmignie & Bruno Henry de Frahan & Ludwig Lauwers & Philippe Polomé & Guido Van Huylenbroeck & Jef Van Meensel, 2007. "Farm-based modelling of the EU sugar reform: impact on Belgian sugar beet suppliers," European Review of Agricultural Economics, Oxford University Press and the European Agricultural and Applied Economics Publications Foundation, vol. 34(1), pages 21-52, March.
    13. George C. Davis & Maria Cristina Espinoza, 1998. "A Unified Approach to Sensitivity Analysis in Equilibrium Displacement Models," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 80(4), pages 868-879.
    14. Jagdish Bhagwati, 1958. "Immiserizing Growth: A Geometrical Note," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 25(3), pages 201-205.
    15. Poonyth, Daneswar & Westhoff, Patrick & Womack, Abner & Adams, Gary, 2000. "Impacts of WTO restrictions on subsidized EU sugar exports," Agricultural Economics, Blackwell, vol. 22(3), pages 233-245, April.
    16. Matty Demont & Marie Cerovska & Wim Daems & Koen Dillen & József Fogarasi & Erik Mathijs & František Muška & Josef Soukup & Eric Tollens, 2008. "Ex Ante Impact Assessment under Imperfect Information: Biotechnology in New Member States of the EU," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 59(3), pages 463-486, September.
    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


    Cited by:

    1. Andrew Schmitz & Troy G. Schmitz & Paul Schure, 2008. "High Commodity Prices and the EU's Single Payment Scheme: Some Consequences of Double‐Dipping," Canadian Journal of Agricultural Economics/Revue canadienne d'agroeconomie, Canadian Agricultural Economics Society/Societe canadienne d'agroeconomie, vol. 56(4), pages 523-531, December.
    2. Tillie, Pascal & Dillen, Koen & Rodríguez-Cerezo, Emilio, 2014. "Modelling ex-ante the economic and environmental impacts of Genetically Modified Herbicide Tolerant maize cultivation in Europe," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 127(C), pages 150-160.
    3. Hosseini, S.S. & Hassanpour, E. & Sadeghian, S.Y., 2009. "An economic evaluation of Iranian public agricultural R&D policy: The case of sugarbeet," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(9), pages 1446-1452, November.
    4. Dillen, Koen & Tollens, Eric & Wesseler, Justus, 2010. "The Barroso Proposal Of Nationalizing Gmapproval: A Look At Ht Sugar Beets Under Changed European Sugar Policy," 14th ICABR Conference, June 16-18, 2010, Ravello, Italy 188086, International Consortium on Applied Bioeconomy Research (ICABR).
    5. Irena Benešová & Helena Řezbová & Luboš Smutka & Karel Tomšík & Adriana Laputková, 2015. "European Sugar Market - Impact of Quota System," Acta Universitatis Agriculturae et Silviculturae Mendelianae Brunensis, Mendel University Press, vol. 63(6), pages 1825-1838.
    6. Svatoš, M. & Maitah, Mansoor & Belova, Anna, 2013. "World Sugar Market – Basic Development Trends and Tendencies," AGRIS on-line Papers in Economics and Informatics, Czech University of Life Sciences Prague, Faculty of Economics and Management, vol. 5(2), pages 1-16, June.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Irena Benešová & Helena Řezbová & Luboš Smutka & Karel Tomšík & Adriana Laputková, 2015. "European Sugar Market - Impact of Quota System," Acta Universitatis Agriculturae et Silviculturae Mendelianae Brunensis, Mendel University Press, vol. 63(6), pages 1825-1838.
    2. Dillen, Koen & Tollens, Eric & Wesseler, Justus, 2010. "The Barroso Proposal Of Nationalizing Gmapproval: A Look At Ht Sugar Beets Under Changed European Sugar Policy," 14th ICABR Conference, June 16-18, 2010, Ravello, Italy 188086, International Consortium on Applied Bioeconomy Research (ICABR).
    3. Demont, Matty & Tollens, Eric, "undated". "When Modern Agricultural (BIO)Technologies Meet Obsolete Trade PoliciesL The Case of the European Union's Sugar Industry," 2002 Conference (46th), February 13-15, 2002, Canberra, Australia 125079, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society.
    4. Demont, Matty & Tollens, Eric, 2001. "Welfare Effects Of Transgenic Sugarbeets In The European Union: A Theoretical Ex-Ante Framework," Working Papers 31852, Katholieke Universiteit Leuven, Centre for Agricultural and Food Economics.
    5. Demont, Matty & Tollens, Eric, 2001. "Ex-Ante Evaluation Of The Economic Impact Of Agricultural Biotechnology In The European Union: The Case Of Transgenic Sugarbeets," 2001 Annual meeting, August 5-8, Chicago, IL 20631, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
    6. Demont, Matty & Tollens, Eric, 2001. "Uncertainties Of Estimating The Welfare Effects Of Agricultural Biotechnology In The European Union," Working Papers 31828, Katholieke Universiteit Leuven, Centre for Agricultural and Food Economics.
    7. Demont, Matty & Tollens, Eric, 2002. "Impact Of Agricultural Biotechnology In The European Union'S Sugar Industry," Working Papers 31854, Katholieke Universiteit Leuven, Centre for Agricultural and Food Economics.
    8. Stefan Wimmer & Johannes Sauer, 2020. "Profitability Development and Resource Reallocation: The Case of Sugar Beet Farming in Germany," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 71(3), pages 816-837, September.
    9. GianCarlo Moschini, 2008. "Biotechnology and the development of food markets: retrospect and prospects," European Review of Agricultural Economics, Oxford University Press and the European Agricultural and Applied Economics Publications Foundation, vol. 35(3), pages 331-355, September.
    10. Falck-Zepeda, Jose & Horna, Daniela & Smale, Melinda, 2007. "The economic impact and the distribution of benefits and risk from the adoption of insect resistant (Bt) cotton in West Africa," IFPRI discussion papers 718, International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI).
    11. GianCarlo Moschini & Harvey E. Lapan, 2005. "Labeling Regulations and Segregation of First- and Second-Generation Genetically Modified Products: Innovation Incentives and Welfare Effects," Center for Agricultural and Rural Development (CARD) Publications 05-wp391, Center for Agricultural and Rural Development (CARD) at Iowa State University.
    12. Dillen, Koen & Demont, Matty & Tollens, Eric, 2008. "Modelling heterogeneity to estimate the ex ante value of biotechnology innovations," 2008 International Congress, August 26-29, 2008, Ghent, Belgium 43945, European Association of Agricultural Economists.
    13. Huan-Niemi, Ellen & Kerkela, Leena, 2005. "Reform in the EU Sugar Regime: Impact on the Global Sugar Markets," 2005 International Congress, August 23-27, 2005, Copenhagen, Denmark 24733, European Association of Agricultural Economists.
    14. repec:lic:licosd:27611 is not listed on IDEAS
    15. Kerkelä, Leena & Huan-Niemi, Ellen, 2005. "Trade Preferences in the EU Sugar Sector: Winners and Losers," Discussion Papers 358, VATT Institute for Economic Research.
    16. 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, December.
    17. Brockmeier, Martina & Sommer, Ulrich & Thomsen, Karin, 2005. "Sugar Policies: An Invincible Bastion for Modelers?," 89th Seminar, February 2-5, 2005, Parma, Italy 232588, European Association of Agricultural Economists.
    18. Bullock, David S. & D'Arcangelo, Filippo Maria & Desquilbet, Marion, 2018. "A discussion of the market and policy failures associated with the adoption of herbicide-tolerant crops," TSE Working Papers 18-959, Toulouse School of Economics (TSE), revised Aug 2019.
    19. Frisvold, George & Reeves, Jeanne, 2015. "Genetically Modified Crops: International Trade And Trade Policy Effects," International Journal of Food and Agricultural Economics (IJFAEC), Alanya Alaaddin Keykubat University, Department of Economics and Finance, vol. 3(2), pages 1-13, April.
    20. John C. Beghin & Barbara El Osta & Jay R. Cherlow & Samarendu Mohanty, 2003. "The Cost Of The U.S. Sugar Program Revisited," Contemporary Economic Policy, Western Economic Association International, vol. 21(1), pages 106-116, January.
    21. Eric Tollens, 2004. "Biodiversity versus transgenic sugar beet: the one euro question," European Review of Agricultural Economics, Oxford University Press and the European Agricultural and Applied Economics Publications Foundation, vol. 31(1), pages 1-18, March.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:bla:canjag:v:56:y:2008:i:4:p:533-553. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    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 CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc 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 RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/caefmea.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.