IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ags/eaae08/44191.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Are EU spatial ex ante coexistence regulations proportional?

Author

Listed:
  • Demont, Matty
  • Daems, W.
  • Dillen, Koen
  • Mathijs, Erik
  • Sausse, C.
  • Tollens, Eric

Abstract

The EU is currently struggling to implement coherent coexistence regulations on genetically modified (GM) and non-GM crops in all member states. While it stresses that any approach needs to be “proportionate to the aim of achieving coexistence”, very few studies have actually attempted to assess whether the proposed spatial ex ante coexistence regulations (SEACERs) satisfy this proportionality condition. In this article, we define proportionality as a functional relationship which is weakly increasing in the incentives for coexistence. We propose a spatial framework based on an existing landscape and introduce the new concept of shadow factor as a measure for the opportunity costs induced by SEACERs. This enables comparing the proportionality of (i) rigid SEACERs which are based on large isolation distances imposed on GM farmers versus (ii) flexible SEACERs based on pollen barrier agreements between neighboring farmers. Our theoretical and empirical findings argue for flexibility as rigid SEACERs violate the proportionality condition and, hence, are not consistent with the objectives of the EU.

Suggested Citation

  • Demont, Matty & Daems, W. & Dillen, Koen & Mathijs, Erik & Sausse, C. & Tollens, Eric, 2008. "Are EU spatial ex ante coexistence regulations proportional?," 2008 International Congress, August 26-29, 2008, Ghent, Belgium 44191, European Association of Agricultural Economists.
  • Handle: RePEc:ags:eaae08:44191
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://purl.umn.edu/44191
    Download Restriction: no

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Giannakas, Konstantinos & Fulton, Murray, 2002. "Consumption effects of genetic modification: what if consumers are right?," Agricultural Economics of Agricultural Economists, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 27(2), August.
    2. Matty Demont & Koen Dillen & Erik Mathijs & Eric Tollens, 2007. "GM Crops in Europe: How Much Value and for Whom?," EuroChoices, The Agricultural Economics Society, vol. 6(3), pages 46-53, December.
    3. Giannakas, Konstantinos & Fulton, Murray, 2002. "Consumption effects of genetic modification: what if consumers are right?," Agricultural Economics, Blackwell, vol. 27(2), pages 97-109, August.
    4. Harvey E. Lapan & Giancarlo Moschini, 2004. "Innovation and Trade with Endogenous Market Failure: The Case of Genetically Modified Products," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 86(3), pages 634-648.
    5. Beckmann, Volker & Wesseler, Justus, 2005. "Spatial Dimension Of Externalities And The Coase Theorem: Implications For Co-Existence Of Transgenic Crops," 2005 Annual meeting, July 24-27, Providence, RI 19534, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
    6. Bullock, D. S. & Desquilbet, M., 2002. "The economics of non-GMO segregation and identity preservation," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 27(1), pages 81-99, February.
    7. Volker Beckmann & Claudio Soregaroli & Justus Wesseler, 2006. "Coexistence Rules and Regulations in the European Union," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 88(5), pages 1193-1199.
    8. Allen, Douglas W & Lueck, Dean, 1998. "The Nature of the Farm," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 41(2), pages 343-386, October.
    9. GianCarlo Moschini & Harun Bulut & Luigi Cembalo, 2005. "On the Segregation of Genetically Modified, Conventional and Organic Products in European Agriculture: A Multi-market Equilibrium Analysis," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 56(3), pages 347-372.
    10. José Falck Zepeda, 2006. "Coexistence, Genetically Modified Biotechnologies and Biosafety: Implications for Developing Countries," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 88(5), pages 1200-1208.
    11. Munro, Alistair, 2008. "The spatial impact of genetically modified crops," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 67(4), pages 658-666, November.
    12. Belcher, Ken & Nolan, James & Phillips, Peter W.B., 2005. "Genetically modified crops and agricultural landscapes: spatial patterns of contamination," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 53(3), pages 387-401, May.
    13. Matty Demont & Marie Cerovska & Wim Daems & Koen Dillen & József Fogarasi & Erik Mathijs & Frantisek Muska & Josef Soukup & Eric Tollens, 2008. ""Ex Ante" Impact Assessment under Imperfect Information: Biotechnology in New Member States of the EU," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 59(3), pages 463-486, September.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Jennifer Schweiger & Ali Ferjani & Achim Spiller, 2010. "Agentenbasierte Abschätzung der Wirtschaft-lichkeit von transgenen Kulturen anhand von Beispielbetrieben in einer Schweizer Ackerbau-region," Journal of Socio-Economics in Agriculture (Until 2015: Yearbook of Socioeconomics in Agriculture), Swiss Society for Agricultural Economics and Rural Sociology, vol. 3(1), pages 3-37.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    policy analysis; GIS; shadow factor; Agricultural and Food Policy; Crop Production/Industries;

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:ags:eaae08:44191. 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). General contact details of provider: http://edirc.repec.org/data/eaaeeea.html .

    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 CitEc recognized a reference but did not link an item in RePEc 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 RePEc Author Service 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.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.