IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/ecolec/v68y2009i10p2688-2695.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Institutions and the R&D of GM-crops

Author

Listed:
  • Kvakkestad, Valborg

Abstract

This paper analyzes how different institutional structures shape the research and development (R&D) of genetically modified crops (GM-crops). Whether this R&D is conducted within companies, cooperatives or public research organizations (both publicly and privately funded R&D) is expected to influence the type of crops and traits that are developed and therefore the effects on society and ecosystems that potentially could follow from the use of GM-crops. This issue is analyzed empirically by statistical analysis of 1323 notifications for field trials with GM-crops that have been submitted under two EU Directives in seven European countries. The results show that the type of R&D organization influences the traits and crops that are developed. Companies are more likely to submit notifications that concern GM-crops that secure the potential for profit than are other types of R&D organizations, while R&D organizations that are purely publicly funded are more likely to submit notifications that only concern biosafety research than are cooperatives and companies. Consideration of the environment, food safety and food security might justify institutional reforms of R&D of GM-crops. This might include increased public funding combined with changes in intellectual property rights.

Suggested Citation

  • Kvakkestad, Valborg, 2009. "Institutions and the R&D of GM-crops," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 68(10), pages 2688-2695, August.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:ecolec:v:68:y:2009:i:10:p:2688-2695
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0921-8009(09)00196-7
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Goeschl, Timo & Swanson, Timothy, 2003. "The development impact of genetic use restriction technologies: a forecast based on the hybrid crop experience," Environment and Development Economics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 8(1), pages 149-165, February.
    2. Pray, Carl E. & Umali-Deininger, Dina, 1998. "The private sector in agricultural research systems: Will it fill the gap?," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 26(6), pages 1127-1148, June.
    3. Arild Vatn, 2005. "Institutions and the Environment," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 2826.
    4. Srinivasan, C.S. & Thirtle, Colin, 2003. "Potential economic impacts of terminator technologies: policy implications for developing countries," Environment and Development Economics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 8(1), pages 187-205, February.
    5. Partha, Dasgupta & David, Paul A., 1994. "Toward a new economics of science," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 23(5), pages 487-521, September.
    6. Vatn, Arild, 2005. "Rationality, institutions and environmental policy," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 55(2), pages 203-217, November.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Bobulescu, Roxana & Fritscheova, Aneta, 2021. "Convivial innovation in sustainable communities: Four cases in France," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 181(C).
    2. Trædal, Leif Tore & Vedeld, Pål Olav & Pétursson, Jón Geir, 2016. "Analyzing the transformations of forest PES in Vietnam: Implications for REDD+," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 62(C), pages 109-117.
    3. Spash, Clive L. & Vatn, Arild, 2006. "Transferring environmental value estimates: Issues and alternatives," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 60(2), pages 379-388, December.
    4. Padmanabhan, Martina, 2011. "Women and men as conservers, users and managers of agrobiodiversity," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 40(6), pages 968-976.
    5. Clive L Spash, 2009. "Social Ecological Economics," Socio-Economics and the Environment in Discussion (SEED) Working Paper Series 2009-08, CSIRO Sustainable Ecosystems.
    6. Dimitrios Zikos, 2020. "Revisiting the Role of Institutions in Transformative Contexts: Institutional Change and Conflicts," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(21), pages 1-20, October.
    7. Jean-David Gerber, St phane Nahrath, 2013. "Beitrag zur Entwicklung eines Ressourcenansatzes der Nachhaltigkeit," Diskussionsschriften credresearchpaper03, Universitaet Bern, Departement Volkswirtschaft - CRED.
    8. Kathleen McAfee, 2012. "The Contradictory Logic of Global Ecosystem Services Markets," Development and Change, International Institute of Social Studies, vol. 43(1), pages 105-131, January.
    9. Lars Hein & Pete Roberts & Lucia Gonzalez, 2016. "Valuing a Statistical Life Year in Relation to Clean Air," Journal of Environmental Assessment Policy and Management (JEAPM), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 18(04), pages 1-24, December.
    10. Roel Plant & Spike Boydell & Jason Prior & Joanne Chong & Aleta Lederwasch, 2017. "From liability to opportunity: An institutional approach towards value-based land remediation," Environment and Planning C, , vol. 35(2), pages 197-220, March.
    11. Dimitrios Zikos & Alevgul Sorman & Marisa Lau, 2015. "Beyond water security: asecuritisation and identity in Cyprus," International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 15(3), pages 309-326, September.
    12. Phan, Thu-Ha Dang & Brouwer, Roy & Davidson, Marc David, 2017. "A Global Survey and Review of the Determinants of Transaction Costs of Forestry Carbon Projects," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 133(C), pages 1-10.
    13. Hernan G. Roxas & Val Lindsay & Nicholas Ashill & Antong Victorio, 2007. "Institutional analysis of strategic choice of micro, small, and medium enterprises : a conceptual framework," Philippine Review of Economics, University of the Philippines School of Economics and Philippine Economic Society, vol. 44(1), pages 151-186, June.
    14. Gendron, Corinne, 2014. "Beyond environmental and ecological economics: Proposal for an economic sociology of the environment," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 105(C), pages 240-253.
    15. Dzeraviaha, Ihar, 2018. "Mainstream economics toolkit within the ecological economics framework," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 148(C), pages 15-21.
    16. Heller, Marit H. & Vatn, Arild, 2017. "The divisive and disruptive effect of a weight-based waste fee," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 131(C), pages 275-285.
    17. Jack Reardon, 2009. "The Soulful Science: What Economists Really do and Why it Matters," Review of Social Economy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 67(3), pages 395-398.
    18. Muhammad Asif Kamran & Ganesh Prasad Shivakoti, 2013. "Comparative institutional analysis of customary rights and colonial law in spate irrigation systems of Pakistani Punjab," Water International, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 38(5), pages 601-619, September.
    19. Géraldine THIRY & Philippe ROMAN, 2015. "L’indice de richesse inclusive : l’économie Mainstream au-delà de ses limites, mais en deçà de la soutenabilité ?," LIDAM Discussion Papers IRES 2015001, Université catholique de Louvain, Institut de Recherches Economiques et Sociales (IRES).
    20. Christos Zografos & Richard B. Howarth, 2010. "Deliberative Ecological Economics for Sustainability Governance," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 2(11), pages 1-19, October.

    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:eee:ecolec:v:68:y:2009:i:10:p:2688-2695. 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: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/ecolecon .

    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.