Who Pays the Costs of Non-GMO Segregation and Identity Preservation?
Our aim is to explore who pays the costs and who reaps the benefits of maintaining a dual-market system of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) and non-GMOs. We analyze the welfare effects of the introduction of consumer “hatred” given GMO technology and the introduction of GMO technology given hatred. Making alternative assumptions of competitive and then monopolistic supply, we recognize that identity preservation (IP) of non-GMOs creates costs for IP and non-IP producers. We model these costs as depending on the sizes of the two supply channels. Copyright 2003, 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): 91 (2003)
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.:
- Mayer, Holly & Furtan, W. H., 1999. "Economics of transgenic herbicide-tolerant canola: The case of western Canada," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 24(4), pages 431-442, August.
- McBride, William D. & Books, Nora, 2000.
"Survey Evidence On Producer Use And Costs Of Genetically Modified Seed,"
Proceedings:Transitions in Agbiotech: Economics of Strategy and Policy, June 24-25, 1999, Washington, D.C.
26009, Regional Research Project NE-165 Private Strategies, Public Policies, and Food System Performance.
- William D. McBride & Nora Books, 2000. "Survey evidence on producer use and costs of genetically modified seed," Agribusiness, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 16(1), pages 6-20.
- Bullock, D. S. & Desquilbet, M., 2002.
"The economics of non-GMO segregation and identity preservation,"
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).
- Giannakas, Konstantinos & Fulton, Murray, 2002. "Consumption effects of genetic modification: what if consumers are right?," Agricultural Economics, Blackwell, vol. 27(2), pages 97-109, August.
- Desquilbet, Marion & Lemarie, Stephane & Levert, Fabrice, 2002. "Potential Adoption of Genetically Modified Rapeseed in France, Effects on Revenues of Farmers and Upstream Companies: an ex ante evaluation," 2002 International Congress, August 28-31, 2002, Zaragoza, Spain 24975, European Association of Agricultural Economists.
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:oup:ajagec:v:91:y:2003:i:3:p:656-672. 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: (Oxford University Press)or (Christopher F. Baum)
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.