IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/ajagec/v91y2003i3p656-672.html

Who Pays the Costs of Non-GMO Segregation and Identity Preservation?

Author

Listed:
  • Marion Desquilbet
  • David S. Bullock

Abstract

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.

Suggested Citation

  • Marion Desquilbet & David S. Bullock, 2003. "Who Pays the Costs of Non-GMO Segregation and Identity Preservation?," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 91(3), pages 656-672.
    • Handle: RePEc:oup:ajagec:v:91:y:2003:i:3:p:656-672
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1111/j.1467-8276.2009.01262.x
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version below or

    for a different version of it.

    Other versions of this item:

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. is not listed on IDEAS
    2. 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, December.
    3. Sobolevsky, Andrei & Moschini, GianCarlo & Lapan, Harvey E., 2002. "Genetically Modified Crop Innovations And Product Differentiation: Trade And Welfare Effects In The Soybean Complex," Hebrew University of Jerusalem Archive 18348, Hebrew University of Jerusalem.
    4. Baker, Andrew & Smyth, Stuart, 2010. "Managing Opportunism in Value-Added Supply Chains:," 14th ICABR Conference, June 16-18, 2010, Ravello, Italy 187979, International Consortium on Applied Bioeconomy Research (ICABR).
    5. Marion Desquilbet & Sylvaine Poret, 2014. "How do GM/non GM coexistence regulations affect markets and welfare?," European Journal of Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 37(1), pages 51-82, February.
    6. 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.
    7. Nielsen, Chantal Pohl & Robinson, Sherman & Thierfelder, Karen, 2002. "Trade In Genetically Modified Food: A Survey Of Empirical Studies," TMD Discussion Papers 16317, CGIAR, International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI).
    8. Mario F. Teisl & Julie A. Caswell, 2003. "Information Policy and Genetically Modified Food: Weighting the Benefits and Costs," QA - Rivista dell'Associazione Rossi-Doria, Associazione Rossi Doria, issue 4, March.
    9. Thomas Venus & Nicholas Kalaitzandonakes & Justus Wesseler, 2012. "Ist das Angebot von Nahrungsmitteln "Ohne Gentechnik" wirtschaftlich nachhaltig?," Vierteljahrshefte zur Wirtschaftsforschung / Quarterly Journal of Economic Research, DIW Berlin, German Institute for Economic Research, vol. 81(4), pages 93-110.
    10. International Food Policy Research Institute, 2002. "Trade in genetically modified food: a survey of empirical studies," TMD discussion papers 106, International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI).
    11. Arthur P. J. Mol & Peter Oosterveer, 2015. "Certification of Markets, Markets of Certificates: Tracing Sustainability in Global Agro-Food Value Chains," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 7(9), pages 1-21, September.
    12. Olivier Bonroy & Christos Constantatos, 2015. "On the Economics of Labels: How Their Introduction Affects the Functioning of Markets and the Welfare of All Participants," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 97(1), pages 239-259.
    13. Bullock, David S. & D'Arcangelo, Filippo Maria & Desquilbet, Marion, 2018. "A discussion of the market and policy failures associated with the adoption of herbicide-tolerant crops," TSE Working Papers 18-959, Toulouse School of Economics (TSE), revised Aug 2019.
    14. GianCarlo Moschini, 2015. "In medio stat virtus: coexistence policies for GM and non-GM production in spatial equilibrium," European Review of Agricultural Economics, Oxford University Press and the European Agricultural and Applied Economics Publications Foundation, vol. 42(5), pages 851-874.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:oup:ajagec:v:91:y:2003:i:3:p:656-672. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: Oxford University Press (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/aaeaaea.html .

    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.