IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/
MyIDEAS: Log in (now much improved!) to save this paper

Standards, trade and protection: the case of GMOs

Author Info

Listed author(s):
  • Kym Anderson

    ()

    (World Bank)

  • Lee Ann Jacskon

    (WTO Secretariat, Geneva)

Abstract

A global economy-wide model (GTAP) is used to go beyond estimating how GM crop variety adoption affects adopting and non-adopting economies, with or without policy responses to this technology, by indicating effects also on real incomes of farmers. The results suggest the EU moratorium on imports of GM food helps EU farmers even though it requires them to forego the productivity boost they could receive from the new biotechnology. An estimate of the cost of that EU moratorium to developing countries and the world also is provided.

Download Info

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.

File URL: http://www.adelaide.edu.au/cies/papers/0411.pdf
Download Restriction: no

Paper provided by University of Adelaide, Centre for International Economic Studies in its series Centre for International Economic Studies Working Papers with number 2004-11.

as
in new window

Length: 28 pages
Date of creation: Oct 2004
Handle: RePEc:adl:cieswp:2004-11
Contact details of provider: Postal:
Adelaide SA 5005

Phone: (+ 61 8) 8303 5672
Fax: (+ 61 8) 8223 1460
Web page: http://www.adelaide.edu.au/cies/
Email:


More information through EDIRC

Keywords: Biotechnology; trade policy; political economy; regulation of standards; general equilibrium.;

Other versions of this item:

Find related papers by JEL classification:
  • C68 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Mathematical Methods; Programming Models; Mathematical and Simulation Modeling - - - Computable General Equilibrium Models
  • D58 - Microeconomics - - General Equilibrium and Disequilibrium - - - Computable and Other Applied General Equilibrium Models
  • F13 - International Economics - - Trade - - - Trade Policy; International Trade Organizations
  • O3 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights
  • Q17 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Agriculture - - - Agriculture in International Trade
  • Q18 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Agriculture - - - Agricultural Policy; Food Policy

References listed on IDEAS
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.:

as
in new window


  1. Stone, Susan F. & Matysek, Anna & Dolling, Andrew, 2002. "Modelling Possible Impacts of GM Crops on Australian Trade," Staff Research Papers 31913, Productivity Commission.
  2. Meijl, Hans van & Tongeren, Frank van, 2004. "International diffusion of gains from biotechnology and the European Union's Common Agricultural Policy," Agricultural Economics, Blackwell, vol. 31(2-3), pages 307-316, December.
  3. Grossman, Gene M & Helpman, Elhanan, 1995. "Trade Wars and Trade Talks," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 103(4), pages 675-708, August.
  4. Robert W. Staiger & Kyle Bagwell, 1999. "An Economic Theory of GATT," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 89(1), pages 215-248, March.
  5. R. K. Lindner & F. G. Jarrett, 1978. "Supply Shifts and the Size of Research Benefits," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 60(1), pages 48-58.
  6. Harrison, W Jill & Pearson, K R, 1996. "Computing Solutions for Large General Equilibrium Models Using GEMPACK," Computational Economics, Springer;Society for Computational Economics, vol. 9(2), pages 83-127, May.
  7. Nielsen, Chantal Pohl & Thierfelder, Karen & Robinson, Sherman, 2003. "Consumer preferences and trade in genetically modified foods," Journal of Policy Modeling, Elsevier, vol. 25(8), pages 777-794, November.
  8. Chantal Nielsen & Kym Anderson, 2001. "Global market effects of alternative European responses to genetically modified organisms," Review of World Economics (Weltwirtschaftliches Archiv), Springer;Institut für Weltwirtschaft (Kiel Institute for the World Economy), vol. 137(2), pages 320-346, June.
Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

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

as
in new window


Cited by:

  1. Anderson, Kym & Damania, Richard & Jackson, Lee Ann, 2004. "Trade Standards and the Political Economy of Genetically Modified Food," CEPR Discussion Papers 4526, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
  2. Kym Anderson, 2005. "Agricultural trade reform and poverty reduction in developing countries," Chapters,in: Trade Policy Reforms and Development, chapter 9 Edward Elgar Publishing.
  3. 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.
  4. Anderson, Kym & Jackson, Lee Ann, 2004. "GM food technology abroad and its implications for Australia and New Zealand," 2004 Conference (48th), February 11-13, 2004, Melbourne, Australia 58365, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society.
  5. Anderson, Kym & Huang, Jikun & Ianchovichina, Elena, 2004. "Will China's WTO accession worsen farm household incomes?," China Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 15(4), pages 443-456.
  6. Colyer, Dale, 2004. "Environmental Provisions in Trade Agreements," Conference Papers 19103, West Virginia University, Department of Agricultural Resource Economics.
  7. Anderson, Kym & Huang, Jikun & Ianchovichina, Elena, 2004. "Will China's WTO Accession Worsen Rural Poverty?," CEPR Discussion Papers 4196, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.

This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

Access and download statistics

When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:adl:cieswp:2004-11. 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: (Dmitriy Kvasov)

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.

If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link to it, you can help with 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 profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis using RePEc data.