IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/
MyIDEAS: Log in (now much improved!) to save this article

On the proportionality of EU spatial ex ante coexistence regulations

Listed author(s):
  • Demont, Matty
  • Dillen, Koen
  • Daems, Wim
  • Sausse, Christophe
  • Tollens, Eric
  • Mathijs, Erik

The EU is currently struggling to implement coherent coexistence regulations on genetically modified (GM) and non-GM crops in all member states. While it stresses that any approach needs to be "proportionate to the aim of achieving coexistence", very few studies have actually attempted to assess whether the proposed spatial ex ante coexistence regulations (SEACERs) satisfy this proportionality condition. In this article, we propose a spatial framework based on an existing landscape and introduce the concept of shadow factor as a measure for the opportunity costs induced by SEACERs. Our empirical findings led us to advance the proposition that flexible SEACERs based on pollen barriers are more likely to respect the proportionality condition than rigid SEACERs based on isolation distances. Particularly in early adoption stages, imposing rigid SEACERs may substantially slow down GM crop adoption. Our findings argue for incorporating a certain degree of flexibility into SEACERs by advising pollen barrier agreements between farmers rather than imposing rigid isolation distances on GM farmers. The empirical questions of proportionality and flexibility have been largely ignored in the literature on coexistence and provide timely information for EU policy makers.

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: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0306-9192(09)00039-6
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 Food Policy.

Volume (Year): 34 (2009)
Issue (Month): 6 (December)
Pages: 508-518

as
in new window

Handle: RePEc:eee:jfpoli:v:34:y:2009:i:6:p:508-518
Contact details of provider: Web page: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/foodpol

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.:

as
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. David A. Hennessy & GianCarlo Moschini, 2006. "Regulatory Actions under Adjustment Costs and the Resolution of Scientific Uncertainty," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 88(2), pages 308-323.
  3. Allen, Douglas W & Lueck, Dean, 1998. "The Nature of the Farm," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 41(2), pages 343-386, October.
  4. Oehmke, James F. & Wolf, Christopher A., 2004. "Is Monsanto Leaving Money on the Table? Monopoly Pricing and Bt Cotton Value with Heterogeneous Adopters," Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics, Southern Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 36(03), December.
  5. 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.
  6. Harvey E. Lapan & Giancarlo Moschini, 2004. "Innovation and Trade with Endogenous Market Failure: The Case of Genetically Modified Products," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 86(3), pages 634-648.
  7. Sunding, David & Zilberman, David, 2001. "The agricultural innovation process: Research and technology adoption in a changing agricultural sector," Handbook of Agricultural Economics,in: B. L. Gardner & G. C. Rausser (ed.), Handbook of Agricultural Economics, edition 1, volume 1, chapter 4, pages 207-261 Elsevier.
  8. José Falck Zepeda, 2006. "Coexistence, Genetically Modified Biotechnologies and Biosafety: Implications for Developing Countries," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 88(5), pages 1200-1208.
  9. Lapan, Harvey E & Moschini, Giancarlo, 2000. "Incomplete Adoption of a Superior Innovation," Economica, London School of Economics and Political Science, vol. 67(268), pages 525-542, November.
  10. Feder, Gershon & Just, Richard E & Zilberman, David, 1985. "Adoption of Agricultural Innovations in Developing Countries: A Survey," Economic Development and Cultural Change, University of Chicago Press, vol. 33(2), pages 255-298, January.
  11. 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.
  12. Matty Demont & Koen Dillen & Erik Mathijs & Eric Tollens, 2007. "GM Crops in Europe: How Much Value and for Whom?," EuroChoices, The Agricultural Economics Society, vol. 6(3), pages 46-53, December.
  13. Skevas, Theodoros & Wesseler, Justus & Fevereiro, Pedro, 2009. "Coping with ex-ante regulations for planting Bt maize: the Portuguese experience," MPRA Paper 25609, University Library of Munich, Germany.
  14. Eric Tollens, 2004. "Biodiversity versus transgenic sugar beet: the one euro question," European Review of Agricultural Economics, Foundation for the European Review of Agricultural Economics, vol. 31(1), pages 1-18, March.
  15. 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.
  16. Gonzalez, X. P. & Alvarez, C. J. & Crecente, R., 2004. "Evaluation of land distributions with joint regard to plot size and shape," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 82(1), pages 31-43, October.
  17. Munro, Alistair, 2008. "The spatial impact of genetically modified crops," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 67(4), pages 658-666, November.
  18. 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.
  19. Robert Weaver & Justus Wessler, 2004. "Monopolistic pricing power for transgenic crops when technology adopters face irreversible benefits and costs," Applied Economics Letters, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 11(15), pages 969-973.
  20. 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.
  21. Breustedt, Gunnar & Muller-Scheessel, Jorg & Latacz-Lohmann, Uwe, 2008. "Forecasting the Adoption of GM Oilseed Rape: Evidence from a Discrete Choice Experiment," 82nd Annual Conference, March 31 - April 2, 2008, Royal Agricultural College, Cirencester, UK 36771, Agricultural Economics Society.
  22. Gunnar Breustedt & Jörg Müller-Scheeßel & Uwe Latacz-Lohmann, 2008. "Forecasting the Adoption of GM Oilseed Rape: Evidence from a Discrete Choice Experiment in Germany," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 59(2), pages 237-256, 06.
  23. 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.
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:jfpoli:v:34:y:2009:i:6:p:508-518. 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.