A model to evaluate the consequences of GM and non-GM segregation scenarios on GM crop placement in the landscape and cross-pollination risk management
Under European regulations, a product is labelled as GM (genetically modified) if more than 0.9% of one of its ingredients originates from GM material. During collection, crops from many fields are combined to fill a silo. To avoid the risk of mixing GM and non-GM harvests, it is possible to dedicate a silo to a given crop or to define specific times for GM and non-GM product delivery to silos. To evaluate these scenarios for the maize supply chain, we propose a combination of a model of farmers' varietal choice (based on profit evaluation at the field level, taking into account transport costs as well as price and cost differences between GM and non-GM products) and a spatially-explicit gene flow model. Consequences of different segregation strategies for collection zone organization can therefore be compared while using the percentage of GM grain in non-GM crops due to cross-pollination. The 'temporal' strategy leads to a uniform area of GM or non-GM maize, depending on the prices and the weather risks. The 'spatial' strategy leads to areas of either GM or non-GM crops surrounding the corresponding collection silo. GM presence in non-GM batches depends on the size of the non-GM zone and on the prevailing wind. We show how divergent commercial strategies of grain merchants could have consequences on GM presence in non-GM batches.
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.
As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.
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.:
- Bullock, David S. & Desquilbet, Marion & Nitsi, Elisavet I., 2000.
"The Economics Of Non-Gmo Segregation And Identity Preservation,"
2000 Annual meeting, July 30-August 2, Tampa, FL
21845, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
- 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.
- Demont, Matty & Daems, Wim & Dillen, Koen & Mathijs, Erik & Sausse, Christophe & Tollens, Eric, 2008. "Regulating coexistence in Europe: Beware of the domino-effect!," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 64(4), pages 683-689, February.
- Volker Beckmann & Claudio Soregaroli & Justus Wesseler, 2006. "Coexistence Rules and Regulations in the European Union," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 88(5), pages 1193-1199.
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:agisys:v:101:y:2009:i:1-2:p:49-56. 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: (Zhang, Lei)
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.