IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/h/spr/nrmchp/978-0-387-36953-2_22.html
   My bibliography  Save this book chapter

Benefits and Costs of Biosafety Regulation in India and China

In: Regulating Agricultural Biotechnology: Economics and Policy

Author

Listed:
  • Carl E. Pray

    (Rutgers University)

  • Jikun Huang

    (Chinese Academy of Science)

  • Ruifa Hu

    (Chinese Academy of Science)

  • Qihuai Wang

    (Chinese Ministry of Agriculture)

  • Bharat Ramaswami

    (Indian Statistical Institute)

  • Prajakta Bengali

    (Marketics Technologies India Pvt. Ltd.)

Abstract

Developing countries are rushing to build effective biosafely regulatory systems in response to the spread of genetically modified organisms. So far, few of them have considered the costs and benefits of building and implementing such a system. This chapter takes a modest step in that direction by listing some of the possible costs and benefits of regulation and then giving some examples of costs and benefits to regulation in India and China. It finds that private firms’ costs of complying with biosafety regulations for Bt cotton have been substantial in India but much less in China. On the benefits side the paper provides a detailed example of economic benefits from restricting unapproved genes in China and evidence that a transparent regulatory system might increase the demand for GM products.

Suggested Citation

  • Carl E. Pray & Jikun Huang & Ruifa Hu & Qihuai Wang & Bharat Ramaswami & Prajakta Bengali, 2006. "Benefits and Costs of Biosafety Regulation in India and China," Natural Resource Management and Policy, in: Richard E. Just & Julian M. Alston & David Zilberman (ed.), Regulating Agricultural Biotechnology: Economics and Policy, chapter 0, pages 481-508, Springer.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:nrmchp:978-0-387-36953-2_22
    DOI: 10.1007/978-0-387-36953-2_22
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    To our knowledge, this item is not available for download. To find whether it is available, there are three options:
    1. Check below 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.

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Paulina Kubisz & Graham Dalton & Edward Majewski & Kinga Pogodzińska, 2021. "Facts and Myths about GM Food—The Case of Poland," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 11(8), pages 1-16, August.
    2. Liu, Elaine M. & Huang, JiKun, 2013. "Risk preferences and pesticide use by cotton farmers in China," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 103(C), pages 202-215.

    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:spr:nrmchp:978-0-387-36953-2_22. 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    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.