Dominos in the dairy: An analysis of transgenic maize in Dutch dairy farming
Isolation distances to limit the risk of cross-pollination from transgenic to nontransgenic crops can severely limit the potential use of transgenic crops through a so-called 'domino effect' where a field of non-transgenic crops limits adoption of transgenic crops not only on plots in its direct vicinity, but also in plots further away as its neighbors are forced to grow the non-transgenic varieties, forcing their neighbors to grow the non-transgenic variety, and so on. The extent to which this effect takes place, however, may depend crucially on the type of farm. For example, dairy farms can use grassland as a buffer between transgenic and conventional maize plots. This article assesses the effects of isolation distances for transgenic maize in dairy farming. A spatially explicit farm model is applied to a region in the Southern Netherlands to identify to what extent a single farmer (who uses non-transgenic maize) can limit other farmers’ potential to grow transgenic maize. The main findings are that 50% or more of the farms in the study area will not affect the potential adoption of transgenic maize by growing conventional maize at all. This result even holds under distance measures of 800m, which is the largest distance implemented by member states of the European Union. When they do have such effects, isolation distances can reduce the benefits from transgenic maize by €5,000 - €6,000, for a considerable part through a domino effect. Large net benefits of transgenic maize may limit the spatial effects as farmers are more willing to relocate maize production to areas where transgenic maize is allowed.
|Date of creation:||2011|
|Contact details of provider:|| Web page: http://www.eaae.org|
More information through EDIRC
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.:
- Soregaroli, Claudio & Wesseler, Justus, 2005. "Minimum Distance Requirements and Liability: Implications for Co-Existence," MPRA Paper 33230, University Library of Munich, Germany.
- Wesseler, Justus & Scatasta, Sara & Nillesen, Eleonora, 2007. "The maximum incremental social tolerable irreversible costs (MISTICs) and other benefits and costs of introducing transgenic maize in the EU-15," MPRA Paper 33229, University Library of Munich, Germany.
- 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.
- 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, 09.
- Michele Graziano Ceddia & Mark Bartlett & Caterina De Lucia & Charles Perrings, 2011. "On the regulation of spatial externalities: coexistence between GM and conventional crops in the EU and the ‘newcomer principle’," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 55(1), pages 126-143, 01.
- Murray Rothbard, 1982. "Law, Property Rights, and Air Pollution," Cato Journal, Cato Journal, Cato Institute, vol. 2(1), pages 55-99, Spring.
- Skevas, Theodoros & Fevereiro, Pedro & Wesseler, Justus, 2010. "Coexistence regulations and agriculture production: A case study of five Bt maize producers in Portugal," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(12), pages 2402-2408, October.
- Nicola Consmüller & Volker Beckmann & Martin Petrick, 2010. "An econometric analysis of regional adoption patterns of Bt maize in Germany," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 41(3-4), pages 275-284, 05.
- Demont, Matty & Daems, Wim & Dillen, Koen & Mathijs, Erik & Sausse, Christophe & Tollens, Eric, 2008. "Regulating coexistence in Europe: Beware of the domino-effect!," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 64(4), pages 683-689, February.
- Guillaume P. Gruère & Colin A. Carter & Y. Hossein Farzin, 2009. "Explaining International Differences in Genetically Modified Food Labeling Policies," Review of International Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 17(3), pages 393-408, 08.
- Gray, Emily & Ancev, Tihomir & Drynan, Ross, 2011. "Coexistence of GM and non-GM crops with endogenously determined separation," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(12), pages 2486-2493.
- Berentsen, P. B. M. & Giesen, G. W. J., 1995. "An environmental-economic model at farm level to analyse institutional and technical change in dairy farming," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 49(2), pages 153-175.
- Sara Scatasta & Justus Wesseler & Jill Hobbs, 2007. "Differentiating the consumer benefits from labeling of GM food products," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 37(2-3), pages 237-242, 09.
- Demont, Matty & Dillen, Koen & Daems, Wim & Sausse, Christophe & Tollens, Eric & Mathijs, Erik, 2009. "On the proportionality of EU spatial ex ante coexistence regulations," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 34(6), pages 508-518, December.
- Rolf Groeneveld & Carla Grashof-Bokdam & Ekko van Ierland, 2005. "Metapopulations in Agricultural Landscapes: A Spatially Explicit Trade-off Analysis," Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 48(4), pages 527-547.
- 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.
- Ceddia, Michele Graziano & Bartlett, Mark & Lucia, Caterina De & Perrings, Charles, 2011. "On the regulation of spatial externalities: coexistence between GM and conventional crops in the EU and the ‘newcomer principle’," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 55(1), March.
- Munro, Alistair, 2008. "The spatial impact of genetically modified crops," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 67(4), pages 658-666, November.
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ags:eaae11:114595. 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.