Grading, Minimum Quality Standards, and the Labeling of Genetically Modified Products
We relate the labeling of genetically modified (GM) products to the theory of grading and minimum quality standards. The model represents three stages in the supply chain, assumes a vertical product differentiation framework, allows for the accidental commingling of non-GM products, and treats regulation as a purity threshold for non-GM products. We find that a non-GM purity level that is too strict leads to the disappearance of the non-GM product, and that some quality standard benefits farmers. Indeed, the standard that is optimal from the perspective of producers is stricter than what is optimal for consumers and for societal welfare. Copyright 2007, Oxford University Press.
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.
Volume (Year): 89 (2007)
Issue (Month): 3 ()
|Contact details of provider:|| Postal: 555 East Wells Street, Suite 1100, Milwaukee, Wisconsin 53202|
Phone: (414) 918-3190
Fax: (414) 276-3349
Web page: http://www.aaea.org/
More information through EDIRC
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.:
- Giancarlo Moschini & Harvey Lapan & Andrei Sobolevsky, 2000.
"Roundup ready® soybeans and welfare effects in the soybean complex,"
John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 16(1), pages 33-55.
- Moschini, GianCarlo & Lapan, Harvey E. & Sobolevsky, Andrei, 2000. "Roundup Ready Soybeans and Welfare Effects in the Soybean Complex," Staff General Research Papers Archive 1799, Iowa State University, Department of Economics.
- 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.
- 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).
- Murray Fulton & Konstantinos Giannakas, 2004. "Inserting GM Products into the Food Chain: The Market and Welfare Effects of Different Labeling and Regulatory Regimes," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 86(1), pages 42-60.
- Dimitri Carolyn, 2003. "Agricultural Marketing Institutions: A Response to Quality Disputes," Journal of Agricultural & Food Industrial Organization, De Gruyter, vol. 1(1), pages 1-25, September.
- José Benjamin Falck-Zepeda & Greg Traxler & Robert G. Nelson, 2000. "Surplus Distribution from the Introduction of a Biotechnology Innovation," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 82(2), pages 360-369.
- 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.
- Harvey E. Lapan & GianCarlo Moschini, 2002. "Innovation and Trade with Endogenous Market Failure: The Case of Genetically Modified Products," Center for Agricultural and Rural Development (CARD) Publications 02-wp302, Center for Agricultural and Rural Development (CARD) at Iowa State University.
- Lapan, Harvey E. & Moschini, GianCarlo, 2004. "Innovation and Trade with Endogenous Market Failure: The Case of Genetically Modified Products," Staff General Research Papers Archive 2109, Iowa State University, Department of Economics.
- Maxwell, John W., 1998. "Minimum quality standards as a barrier to innovation," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 58(3), pages 355-360, March.
- Leland, Hayne E, 1979. "Quacks, Lemons, and Licensing: A Theory of Minimum Quality Standards," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 87(6), pages 1328-1346, December.
- Valletti, Tommaso M, 2000. "Minimum Quality Standards under Cournot Competition," Journal of Regulatory Economics, Springer, vol. 18(3), pages 235-245, November.
- John Crespi & Stéphan Marette, 2003. "“Does Contain” vs. “Does Not Contain”: Does it Matter which GMO Label is Used?," European Journal of Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 16(3), pages 327-344, November.
- Carl Shapiro, 1983. "Premiums for High Quality Products as Returns to Reputations," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 98(4), pages 659-679.
- Mussa, Michael & Rosen, Sherwin, 1978. "Monopoly and product quality," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 18(2), pages 301-317, August.
- Carter, Colin A. & Gruere, Guillaume P., 2003. "International Approaches to the Labeling of Genetically Modified Foods," Choices, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 18(2).
- Bruce Gardner, 2003. "U.S. Food Quality Standards: Fix for Market Failure or Costly Anachronism?," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 85(3), pages 725-730.
- Stivers, Andrew, 2003. "Quality standards with exogenously distributed quality," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 80(1), pages 131-136, July.
- George A. Akerlof, 1970. "The Market for "Lemons": Quality Uncertainty and the Market Mechanism," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 84(3), pages 488-500. Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)