Public Policy and Farm-level Strategies for Coexistence in Germany – A Case Study of Bt-maize in Brandenburg
The regulatory framework for growing GM crops in Germany comprises quite liberal ex-ante regulations with very strict ex-post liability rules to protect other production forms from possible negative side effects of transgenic plants. Regulation is assumed to impose additional costs on farmers who intend to plant Bt-maize. This paper investigates the significance of these costs and the possibility of minimizing them by farm-level strategies such as coordination and cooperation between the Bt-maize growing farmer and his neighbours. A case study investigating the behaviour of Bt-maize growing farmers was carried out in the Oderbruch region in the federal state of Brandenburg, Germany. This region is leading in Bt-maize cultivation in Germany and has a high incidence of the European Corn Borer (Ostrinia nubilalis Hübner). The interviews revealed that additional costs due to ex-ante regulation and ex-post liability were only of minor importance to the Bt-maize growing farmers. All farms were large-scale and could easily manage the construction of buffer zones within their own fields and deliberately avoided the planting of Bt-maize close to their neighbours. Thus advanced inter-farm coordination and cooperation was not necessary to achieve coexistence. However, the fact that Bt-maize was only grown on large-scale farms indicates a significant threshold effect due to the regulatory framework in Germany likely to prevent small-scale farms from planting Bt-maize unless innovative farm-level strategies of coexistence will be developed.
|Date of creation:||2008|
|Date of revision:|
|Contact details of provider:|| Web page: http://www.eaae.org|
More information through EDIRC
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.:
- Soregaroli, Claudio & Wesseler, Justus, 2005. "Minimum Distance Requirements and Liability: Implications for Co-Existence," MPRA Paper 33230, University Library of Munich, Germany.
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ags:eaae08:44187. 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: (AgEcon Search)
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.