Dominos in the dairy: An analysis of transgenic maize in Dutch dairy farming
EU member states require farmers growing transgenic maize to respect a minimum distance from fields with non-transgenic maize. Previous studies have theoretically argued that such minimum distance requirements may lead to a so-called ‘domino effect’ where farmers who want to grow transgenic maize are forced to grow the non-transgenic variety and in turn impose the same constraints on their neighbors. This article applies a spatially explicit farm model to a dairy region in the Southern Netherlands to assess how farmers growing non-transgenic maize limit other farmers' potential to grow transgenic herbicide-resistant maize. The results indicate that the minimum distance requirements can severely limit the benefits from herbicide resistant maize. Having different land use options in one farm, however, enables dairy farmers to grow transgenic maize despite having one or more neighbors growing non-transgenic maize. We also find that the share of the domino effect in the overall impact of minimum distance requirements decreases with the density of farmers not growing transgenic maize.
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.:
- 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.
- Sara Scatasta & Justus Wesseler & Jill Hobbs, 2007. "Differentiating the consumer benefits from labeling of GM food products," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 37(2-3), pages 237-242, 09.
- Gray, Emily & Ancev, Tihomir & Drynan, Ross, 2011. "Coexistence of GM and non-GM crops with endogenously determined separation," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(12), pages 2486-2493.
- Wesseler, Justus & Scatasta, Sara & Nillesen, Eleonora, 2007. "The maximum incremental social tolerable irreversible costs (MISTICs) and other benefits and costs of introducing transgenic maize in the EU-15," MPRA Paper 33229, University Library of Munich, Germany.
- Rolf Groeneveld & Carla Grashof-Bokdam & Ekko van Ierland, 2005. "Metapopulations in Agricultural Landscapes: A Spatially Explicit Trade-off Analysis," Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 48(4), pages 527-547.
- Michele Graziano Ceddia & Mark Bartlett & Caterina De Lucia & Charles Perrings, 2011. "On the regulation of spatial externalities: coexistence between GM and conventional crops in the EU and the ‘newcomer principle’," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 55(1), pages 126-143, 01.
- Skevas, Theodoros & Fevereiro, Pedro & Wesseler, Justus, 2010. "Coexistence regulations and agriculture production: A case study of five Bt maize producers in Portugal," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(12), pages 2402-2408, October.
- Munro, Alistair, 2008. "The spatial impact of genetically modified crops," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 67(4), pages 658-666, November.
- Matty Demont & Marie Cerovska & Wim Daems & Koen Dillen & József Fogarasi & Erik Mathijs & Frantisek Muska & 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, 09.
- Demont, Matty & Dillen, Koen & Daems, Wim & Sausse, Christophe & Tollens, Eric & Mathijs, Erik, 2009. "On the proportionality of EU spatial ex ante coexistence regulations," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 34(6), pages 508-518, December.
- 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.
- Soregaroli, Claudio & Wesseler, Justus, 2005. "Minimum Distance Requirements and Liability: Implications for Co-Existence," MPRA Paper 33230, University Library of Munich, Germany.
- Ceddia, Michele Graziano & Bartlett, Mark & Lucia, Caterina De & Perrings, Charles, 2011. "On the regulation of spatial externalities: coexistence between GM and conventional crops in the EU and the ‘newcomer principle’," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 55(1), March.
- Nicola Consmüller & Volker Beckmann & Martin Petrick, 2010. "An econometric analysis of regional adoption patterns of Bt maize in Germany," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 41(3-4), pages 275-284, 05.
- Berentsen, P. B. M. & Giesen, G. W. J., 1995. "An environmental-economic model at farm level to analyse institutional and technical change in dairy farming," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 49(2), pages 153-175.
- Guillaume P. Gruère & Colin A. Carter & Y. Hossein Farzin, 2009. "Explaining International Differences in Genetically Modified Food Labeling Policies," Review of International Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 17(3), pages 393-408, 08.
- Belcher, Ken & Nolan, James & Phillips, Peter W.B., 2005. "Genetically modified crops and agricultural landscapes: spatial patterns of contamination," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 53(3), pages 387-401, May.
- Murray Rothbard, 1982. "Law, Property Rights, and Air Pollution," Cato Journal, Cato Journal, Cato Institute, vol. 2(1), pages 55-99, Spring.