IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ags/wisagr/12597.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

The Bst Case

Author

Listed:
  • Dobson, William D.

Abstract

Recombinant Bovine Somatotropin (rBST) is a milk production enhancer, a product of industrial microbiology. First approved for commercial sale in the United States (U.S.) by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) in 1994, rBST has been immersed in controversy since the early 1980s. Conflicts among major players with interests in rBST have shaped the product's image and influenced its use. Players with interests in the product include government agencies, Monsanto Corporation (the first firm approved to sell rBST), other firms seeking commercial approval to sell rBST, dairy farmers, and consumers.

Suggested Citation

  • Dobson, William D., 1996. "The Bst Case," Staff Papers 12597, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Department of Agricultural and Applied Economics.
    • Handle: RePEc:ags:wisagr:12597
    DOI: 10.22004/ag.econ.12597
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/12597/files/stpap397.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.22004/ag.econ.12597?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Fallert, Richard & McGuckin, Tom & Betts, Carolyn & Bruner, Gary, 1987. "bST and the Dairy Industry: A National, Regional, and Farm-Level Analysis," Agricultural Economic Reports 308035, United States Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service.
    2. Thompson, Paul B., 1996. "Food Labels and the Ethics of Consent," Choices: The Magazine of Food, Farm, and Resource Issues, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 11(1), pages 1-3.
    3. Caswell, Margriet F. & Fuglie, Keith O. & Klotz, Cassandra A., 1994. "Agricultural Biotechnology: An Economic Perspective," Agricultural Economic Reports 262025, United States Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service.
    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. Powell, Mark R., 1997. "Science in Sanitary and Phytosanitary Dispute Resolution," Discussion Papers 10504, Resources for the Future.
    2. Runge, C. Ford & Jackson, Lee Ann, 1999. "Labeling, Trade And Genetically Modified Organisms (Gmos): A Proposed Solution," Working Papers 14402, University of Minnesota, Center for International Food and Agricultural Policy.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. William D. Dobson, 1996. "The BST Case," Wisconsin-Madison Agricultural and Applied Economics Staff Papers 397, Wisconsin-Madison Agricultural and Applied Economics Department.
    2. William DOBSON, 1996. "The Bst Case," Staff Papers 397, University of Wisconsin Madison, AAE.
    3. Zdenko Stefanides & Loren W. Tauer, 1999. "The Empirical Impact of Bovine Somatotropin on a Group of New York Dairy Farms," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 81(1), pages 95-102.
    4. William D. McBride & Sara Short & Hisham El-Osta, 2004. "The Adoption and Impact of Bovine Somatotropin on U.S. Dairy Farms," Review of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 26(4), pages 472-488.
    5. McBride, William D. & Short, Sara D. & El-Osta, Hisham S., 2002. "Production And Financial Impacts Of The Adoption Of Bovine Somatotropin On U.S. Dairy Farms," 2002 Annual meeting, July 28-31, Long Beach, CA 19908, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
    6. Roberts, Donna, 1998. "Implementation Of The Wto Agreement On The Application Of Sanitary And Phytosanitary Measures: The First Two Years," Working Papers 14588, International Agricultural Trade Research Consortium.
    7. Luo, Wen & Mineo, Keito & Matsushita, Koji & Kanzaki, Mamoru, 2018. "Consumer willingness to pay for modern wooden structures: A comparison between China and Japan," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 91(C), pages 84-93.
    8. Jae-Hwan Han & R. Wes Harrison, 2007. "Factors Influencing Urban Consumers' Acceptance of Genetically Modified Foods," Review of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 29(4), pages 700-719.
    9. Elbehri, Aziz & Yonkers, Robert D., 1995. "Economic Analysis Of The Impacts Of Bovine Somatotropin On The Profitability Of Representative Dairy Farms In The Northeast," Agricultural and Resource Economics Review, Northeastern Agricultural and Resource Economics Association, vol. 24(1), pages 1-13, April.
    10. Weersink, Alfons & Howard, Wayne, 1989. "Regional Adjustment Response in the U.S. Dairy Sector," WAEA/ WFEA Conference Archive (1929-1995) 244856, Western Agricultural Economics Association.
    11. Kolodinsky, Jane & Reynolds, Travis & Baker, Daniel & Watts, Richard, 2015. "Regulatory Capture and Support for and Opposition to Controversial Food System Policy Issues: An Exploratory Analysis," 143rd Joint EAAE/AAEA Seminar, March 25-27, 2015, Naples, Italy 202700, European Association of Agricultural Economists.
    12. Kazmierczak, Richard F., Jr. & Paxton, Kenneth W., 1997. "Technical Change And New Directions For Cotton Production," Station Bulletins 31683, Louisiana State University, Department of Agricultural Economics and Agribusiness.
    13. Padgitt, Merritt & Newton, Doris & Penn, Renata & Sandretto, Carmen, 2000. "Production Practices for Major Crops in U.S. Agriculture, 1990-97," Statistical Bulletin 262287, United States Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service.
    14. Corinne Alexander & Rachael E. Goodhue, 2002. "The pricing of innovations: An application to specialized corn traits," Agribusiness, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 18(3), pages 333-348.
    15. George Zinkhan & Cara Peters & Candice Hollenbeck, 2008. "Do empirical studies address the objectives of the nutrition labeling and education act: a review and synthesis relevant for marketing academicians," International Review on Public and Nonprofit Marketing, Springer;International Association of Public and Non-Profit Marketing, vol. 5(2), pages 89-116, December.
    16. Aldrich, Lorna M. & Blisard, Noel, 1998. "Consumer Acceptance of Biotechnology: Lessons From the rbST Experience," Agricultural Information Bulletins 33663, United States Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service.
    17. Johnson, D. Demcey, 2002. "Issues And Trends In The U.S. Field Crop Sector," Proceedings of the 7th Agricultural and Food Policy Systems Information Workshop, 2001: Structural Change as a Source of Trade Disputes Under NAFTA 16876, Farm Foundation, Agricultural and Food Policy Systems Information Workshops.
    18. W. Lesser & John Bernard & Kaafee Billah, 1999. "Methodologies for ex ante projections of adoption rates for agbiotech products: Lessons learned from rBST," Agribusiness, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 15(2), pages 149-162.
    19. Anwar Naseem & David J. Spielman & Steven Were Omamo, 2010. "Private-sector investment in R&D: a review of policy options to promote its growth in developing-country agriculture," Agribusiness, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 26(1), pages 143-173.
    20. Chaverest, E'licia L. & Wheelock, Gerald & Chembezi, Duncan M. & Kebede, Ellene, 2004. "An Analysis Of Producers' Opinions On Mandatory Labeling Of Gm Products," 2004 Annual Meeting, February 14-18, 2004, Tulsa, Oklahoma 34624, Southern Agricultural Economics Association.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Livestock Production/Industries;

    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:wisagr:12597. 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.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic 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.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: AgEcon Search (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/dauwius.html .

    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.