IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/erevae/v35y2008i1p51-73.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Implications of biotech traits with segregation costs and market segments: the case of Roundup Ready-super- Wheat

Author

Listed:
  • William W. Wilson
  • Eric A. DeVuyst
  • Richard D. Taylor
  • Won W. Koo
  • Bruce L. Dahl

Abstract

Roundup Ready-Wheat (RRW) is one of the first genetically modified (GM) traits for the wheat sector. We develop a spatial partial equilibrium model of the higher-protein hard wheat market and assess the changes in the distribution of welfare associated with release and adoption of RRW. It incorporates segments for GM aversion in each market and segregation costs for each segment. In the most likely scenario, producer and consumer welfare increases by $301 and $252 million, respectively. Producers of hard red spring wheat in the US and Canada gain. There are welfare losses to hard red winter wheat growers in the US and to EU consumers who have to import at a higher cost. Oxford University Press and Foundation for the European Review of Agricultural Economics 2008; all rights reserved. For permissions, please email journals.permissions@oxfordjournals.org, Oxford University Press.

Suggested Citation

  • William W. Wilson & Eric A. DeVuyst & Richard D. Taylor & Won W. Koo & Bruce L. Dahl, 2008. "Implications of biotech traits with segregation costs and market segments: the case of Roundup Ready-super- Wheat," European Review of Agricultural Economics, Oxford University Press and the European Agricultural and Applied Economics Publications Foundation, vol. 35(1), pages 51-73, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:oup:erevae:v:35:y:2008:i:1:p:51-73
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1093/erae/jbn003
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Mauro Vigani & Valentina Raimondi & Alessandro Olper, 2010. "GMO Regulations, International Trade and the Imperialism of Standards," LICOS Discussion Papers 25510, LICOS - Centre for Institutions and Economic Performance, KU Leuven.
    2. Horna, Daniela & Zambrano, Patricia & Falck-Zepeda, Jose Benjamin (ed.), 2013. "Socioeconomic considerations in biosafety decisionmaking: Methods and implementation," IFPRI books, International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI), number 978-0-89629-207-9.
    3. Zhu, Manhong & Schmitz, Andrew & Schmtiz, Troy G., 2016. "Why Has not Genetically Modified Wheat Been Commercialized: A Game Theoretical Perspective," 2016 Annual Meeting, February 6-9, 2016, San Antonio, Texas 230796, Southern Agricultural Economics Association.
    4. Massimiliano Calì & Stephan Nolte & Nicola Cantore, 2013. "Sweet and Sour Changes in Trade Regimes," The World Economy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 36(6), pages 786-806, June.

    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:erevae:v:35:y:2008:i:1:p:51-73. 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/eaaeeea.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.