Biodiversity versus transgenic sugar beet: the one euro question
The decision on whether to release transgenic crops in the EU is subject to irreversibility, uncertainty and flexibility. We analyse the case of herbicide-tolerant sugar beet and assess whether the EU's 1998 de facto moratorium on transgenic crops for sugar beet was correct from a cost--benefit perspective, using a real option approach. We show that the decision was correct, providing households on average value the possible annual irreversible costs of herbicide-tolerant sugar beet at €1 or more. On the other hand, the total net private reversible benefits forgone if the de facto moratorium is not lifted are around €169 million per year. Copyright 2004, Oxford University Press.
To our knowledge, this item is not available for
download. To find whether it is available, there are three
1. Check below under "Related research" whether another version of this item is available online.
2. Check on the provider's web page whether it is in fact available.
3. Perform a search for a similarly titled item that would be available.
Volume (Year): 31 (2004)
Issue (Month): 1 (March)
|Contact details of provider:|| Postal: Oxford University Press, Great Clarendon Street, Oxford OX2 6DP, UK|
Fax: 01865 267 985
Web page: https://academic.oup.com/erae
More information through EDIRC
|Order Information:||Web: http://www.oup.co.uk/journals|
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.:
- Bureau, Jean-Christophe, et al, 1997. "Quota Mobility in the European Sugar Regime," European Review of Agricultural Economics, Foundation for the European Review of Agricultural Economics, vol. 24(1), pages 1-30.
- Pindyck, Robert S., 2000.
"Irreversibilities and the timing of environmental policy,"
Resource and Energy Economics,
Elsevier, vol. 22(3), pages 233-259, July.
- Pindyck, Robert S., 1998. "Irreversibilities and the timing of environmental policy," Working papers WP 4047-98., Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), Sloan School of Management.
- Pretty, J. N. & Brett, C. & Gee, D. & Hine, R. E. & Mason, C. F. & Morison, J. I. L. & Raven, H. & Rayment, M. D. & van der Bijl, G., 2000. "An assessment of the total external costs of UK agriculture," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 65(2), pages 113-136, August.
- 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.
- George C. Davis & Maria Cristina Espinoza, 1998. "A Unified Approach to Sensitivity Analysis in Equilibrium Displacement Models," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 80(4), pages 868-879.
- Fisher, Anthony C., 2000. "Investment under uncertainty and option value in environmental economics," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 22(3), pages 197-204, July.
- Fernandez-Cornejo, Jorge & McBride, William D., 2002. "Adoption Of Bioengineered Crops," Agricultural Economics Reports 33957, United States Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service. Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:oup:erevae:v:31:y:2004:i:1:p:1-18. 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.