IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/isu/genres/10098.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Genetically Modified Crop Innovations and Product Differentiation: Trade and Welfare Effects in the Soybean Complex

Author

Listed:
  • Sobolevsky, Andrei
  • Moschini, GianCarlo
  • Lapan, Harvey E.

Abstract

A partial equilibrium four-region world trade model for the soybean complex is developed in which Roundup Ready (RR) products are weakly inferior substitutes to conventional ones, RR seeds are priced at a premium, and costly segregation is necessary to separate conventional and biotech products. Solution of the calibrated model illustrates how incomplete adoption of RR technology arises in equilibrium. The United States, Argentina, Brazil, and the Rest of the World (ROW) all gain from the introduction of RR soybeans, although some groups may lose. The impacts of RR production or import bans by the ROW or Brazil are analyzed. U.S. price support helps U.S. farmers, despite hurting the United States and has the potential to improve world efficiency.

Suggested Citation

  • Sobolevsky, Andrei & Moschini, GianCarlo & Lapan, Harvey E., 2002. "Genetically Modified Crop Innovations and Product Differentiation: Trade and Welfare Effects in the Soybean Complex," Staff General Research Papers Archive 10098, Iowa State University, Department of Economics.
    • Handle: RePEc:isu:genres:10098
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    To our knowledge, this item is not available for download. To find whether it is available, there are three options:
    1. Check below whether another version of this item is available online.
    2. Check on the provider's web page whether it is in fact available.
    3. Perform a search for a similarly titled item that would be available.

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. 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.
    2. Dixit, Avinash K & Stiglitz, Joseph E, 1977. "Monopolistic Competition and Optimum Product Diversity," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 67(3), pages 297-308, June.
    3. Jagdish N. Bhagwati, 1968. "Distortions and Immiserizing Growth: a Generalization," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 35(4), pages 481-485.
    4. Julian M. Alston & Will J. Martin, 1995. "Reversal of Fortune: Immiserizing Technical Change in Agriculture," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 77(2), pages 251-259.
    5. D.S. Bullock, 2001. "Who pays the costs of non-GMO segregation and identity preservation ?," Post-Print hal-02283458, HAL.
    6. Marion Desquilbet & David S. Bullock, 2003. "Who Pays the Costs of Non-GMO Segregation and Identity Preservation?," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 91(3), pages 656-672.
    7. D.S. Bullock & Marion Desquilbet, 2002. "The economics of non-GMO segregation and identity preservation," Post-Print hal-02364321, HAL.
    8. José Benjamin Falck-Zepeda & Greg Traxler & Robert G. Nelson, 2000. "Surplus Distribution from the Introduction of a Biotechnology Innovation," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 82(2), pages 360-369.
    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. Antonio Seccia & Antonio Stasi & Luigi Roselli, 2006. "Atteggiamento dei consumatori nei confronti dell'evoluzione del sistema agro-alimentare: l'introduzione di alimenti geneticamente modificati," Economia agro-alimentare, FrancoAngeli Editore, vol. 10(1).
    2. Kaye-Blake, William & Saunders, Caroline M., 2006. "Estimated Contribution of Four Biotechnologies to New Zealand Agriculture," 2006 Annual meeting, July 23-26, Long Beach, CA 21133, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
    3. Kaye-Blake, William & Saunders, Caroline M. & Fairweather, John, 2005. "Optimal uptake of second-generation genetically-modified crops," 2005 Conference (49th), February 9-11, 2005, Coff's Harbour, Australia 137932, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society.

    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. 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, December.
    2. GianCarlo Moschini, 2008. "Biotechnology and the development of food markets: retrospect and prospects," European Review of Agricultural Economics, Oxford University Press and the European Agricultural and Applied Economics Publications Foundation, vol. 35(3), pages 331-355, September.
    3. Mario F. Teisl & Julie A. Caswell, 2003. "Information Policy and Genetically Modified Food: Weighting the Benefits and Costs," QA - Rivista dell'Associazione Rossi-Doria, Associazione Rossi Doria, issue 4, March.
    4. GianCarlo Moschini & Harvey E. Lapan, 2005. "Labeling Regulations and Segregation of First- and Second-Generation Genetically Modified Products: Innovation Incentives and Welfare Effects," Center for Agricultural and Rural Development (CARD) Publications 05-wp391, Center for Agricultural and Rural Development (CARD) at Iowa State University.
    5. Harvey Lapan & GianCarlo Moschini, 2007. "Grading, Minimum Quality Standards, and the Labeling of Genetically Modified Products," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 89(3), pages 769-783.
    6. Marion Desquilbet & Sylvaine Poret, 2014. "How do GM/non GM coexistence regulations affect markets and welfare?," European Journal of Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 37(1), pages 51-82, February.
    7. Baker, Andrew & Smyth, Stuart, 2010. "Managing Opportunism in Value-Added Supply Chains:," 14th ICABR Conference, June 16-18, 2010, Ravello, Italy 187979, International Consortium on Applied Bioeconomy Research (ICABR).
    8. GianCarlo Moschini, 2006. "Pharmaceutical and Industrial Traits in Genetically Modified Crops: Coexistence with Conventional Agriculture," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 88(5), pages 1184-1192.
    9. Arthur P. J. Mol & Peter Oosterveer, 2015. "Certification of Markets, Markets of Certificates: Tracing Sustainability in Global Agro-Food Value Chains," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 7(9), pages 1-21, September.
    10. Kalaitzandonakes, Nicholas & Kaufman, James & Miller, Douglas, 2014. "Potential economic impacts of zero thresholds for unapproved GMOs: The EU case," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(C), pages 146-157.
    11. Demont, Matty & Daems, W. & Dillen, Koen & Mathijs, Erik & Sausse, C. & Tollens, Eric, 2008. "Economics of spatial coexistence of genetically modified and conventional crops: Oilseed rape in Central France," 2008 International Congress, August 26-29, 2008, Ghent, Belgium 43650, European Association of Agricultural Economists.
    12. Coléno, F.C. & Angevin, F. & Lécroart, B., 2009. "A model to evaluate the consequences of GM and non-GM segregation scenarios on GM crop placement in the landscape and cross-pollination risk management," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 101(1-2), pages 49-56, June.
    13. Goldsmith, Peter D. & Bender, Karen, 2003. "Ten Conversations about Identity Preservation: Implications for Cooperatives," 2003 Annual Meeting, October 29 31803, NCERA-194 Research on Cooperatives.
    14. Kym Anderson & Lee Ann Jackson, 2005. "GM crop technology and trade restraints: economic implications for Australia and New Zealand," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 49(3), pages 263-281, September.
    15. Parcell, Joseph L., 2002. "Emerging Ip Markets: The Tokyo Grain Exchange Non-Gmo Soybean Contract," Working Papers 26038, University of Missouri Columbia, Department of Agricultural Economics.
    16. Oliveira, Paulo Ricardo Silva & Silveira, José Maria Ferreira Jardim da & Magalhães, Marcelo Marques de & Souza, Roney Fraga, 2020. "International trade in GMOs: have markets paid premiums on Brazilian soybeans?," Revista de Economia e Sociologia Rural (RESR), Sociedade Brasileira de Economia e Sociologia Rural, vol. 58(1), January.
    17. 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.
    18. Merel, Pierre R. & Carter, Colin A., 2005. "The Coexistence of GM and non-GM Crops and the Role of Consumer Preferences," 2005 Annual meeting, July 24-27, Providence, RI 19512, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
    19. Consmuller, Nicola & Beckmann, Volker & Petrick, Martin, 2011. "Towards GMO-free landscapes? Identifying driving factors for the establishment of cooperative GMO-free zones in Germany," 51st Annual Conference, Halle, Germany, September 28-30, 2011 114493, German Association of Agricultural Economists (GEWISOLA).
    20. Anne-Célia Disdier & Lionel Fontagné, 2010. "Trade impact of European measures on GMOs condemned by the WTO panel," Review of World Economics (Weltwirtschaftliches Archiv), Springer;Institut für Weltwirtschaft (Kiel Institute for the World Economy), vol. 146(3), pages 495-514, September.

    More about this item

    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:isu:genres:10098. 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: Curtis Balmer (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/deiasus.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.