IDEAS home Printed from
MyIDEAS: Log in (now much improved!) to save this article

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

Listed author(s):
  • Coléno, F.C.
  • Angevin, F.
  • Lécroart, B.
Registered author(s):

    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.

    File URL:
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    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.

    Article provided by Elsevier in its journal Agricultural Systems.

    Volume (Year): 101 (2009)
    Issue (Month): 1-2 (June)
    Pages: 49-56

    in new window

    Handle: RePEc:eee:agisys:v:101:y:2009:i:1-2:p:49-56
    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.:

    in new window

    1. 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.
    2. 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.
    3. 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.
    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: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: (Dana Niculescu)

    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.