A review of international labeling policies of genetically modified food to evaluate India's proposed rule

AgBioForum

Volumn 10, Issue 1, 2007, Pages 51-64

  Gruère, Guillaume P ^a   Rao, S R ^b  

^a INTERNATIONAL FOOD POLICY RESEARCH INSTITUTE   (United States)

^b Ministry of Science and Technology   (United States)

Author keywords

Consumer choice; Cross country comparison; Food policy; India; International trade; Labeling

Indexed keywords

EID: 36048967657     PISSN: None     EISSN: 1522936X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Review

References (55)

1. Bansal, S., & Ramaswami, B. (2007). The economics of GM food labels: An evaluation of mandatory labeling proposals in India (Forthcoming Discussion Paper). Washington, DC: International Food Policy Research Institute.
2. Bernauer, T. (2003). Genes, trade, and regulation: The seeds of conflict in food biotechnology. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
3. BRIDGES. (2005). Codex sees clash on biotech labeling. BRIDGES Trade BioRes, 5(9).
4. BRIDGES. (2006). Constructive ambiguity saves LMO labeling discussions at MOP-3. BRIDGES Trade BioRes, 6(5).
5. Carter, C.A., & Gruère, G.P. (2003a). International approaches to the labeling of genetically modified foods. Choices, 18(2), 1-4. Available on the World Wide Web: http://www.choicesmagazine.org.
6. Carter, C.A. & Gruère, G.P. (2003b). Mandatory labeling of genetically modified food: Does it really provide consumer choice? AgBioForum, 6(1&2), 68-70. Available on the World Wide Web: http://www.agbioforum.org.
7. Carter, C.A., & Gruère, G.P. (2006). International approval and labeling regulations of genetically modified food in major trading countries. R. Just, J.M. Alston, and D. Zilberman, (Eds.), Regulating Agricultural Biotechnology. Economics and Policies (pp.459-480). New York: Springer Publishing.
8. Cevallos, D. (2006, February 22). Wanted: Labels for genetically engineered products. Inter Press Service News Agency (IPS). Available on the World Wide Web: http://ipsnews.net/news.asp?idnews=32244.
9. Chandrashekhar, G. (2006, March 24). Labeling of GM food: Imported soyaoil will suffer. Business Line.
10. Chang, X. (2007). Labeling policy and impact on consumer's purchasing behavior in China: A case study of vegetable oils in Nanjing. In International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI) and Research and Information Systems for Developing Countries (RIS), Economic Consideration of Biosafety and Biotechnology Regulations in India, Proceedings of a Conference in New Delhi, August 24-25, 2006 (p.16). Washington, DC: IFPRI.
11. Cloutier, M. (2006). Etude Economique sur les Coûts Relatifs à l'Etiquetage Obligatoire des Filières Géné tiquement Modifiées (GM) versus non-GM au Niveau Québé cois. [Economic survey on the costs relating to mandatory labelling of the genetically modified (GM) versus non-GM at the Quebec level]. Report presented to the Ministère de l'Agriculture des Pêcheries et de l'Alimentation du Québec. University of Québec in Montréal, Department of Management and Technology.
12. Crespi, J.M., & Marette, S. (2003). "Does contain" versus "Does not contain:" Does it matter which GMO label is used? European Journal of Law and Economics, 16, 327-344.
13. De Leon, A., Manalo, A., & Guilatco, F.C. (2004). The cost implications of GM food labeling in the Philippines. Study commissioned by the Bureau of Food and Drugs, Department of Health, Republic of The Philippines.
14. Fletcher, A. (2006, June 28). IFT: No consensus on global GM labelling. FoodNavigator.com. Retrieved July 2006 from http://www.foodnavigator.com/ news/ng.asp?n=68728-ift-noconsensus.
15. Foster, M., & French, S. (2007). Market acceptance of GM canola. ABARE Research Report 07.5 prepared for the Australian Government Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestries, Canberra, Australia: Australian Bureau of Agriculture and Resource Economics.
16. Foster, M., & Galeano, D. (2006). Biosafety Protocol - Implications of the documentation regime. ABARE eReport 06.2. Canberra, Australia: Australian Bureau of Agricultural and Resource Economics.
17. Fulton, M., & Giannakas, K. (2004). Inserting GM products into the food chain: The market and welfare effects of different labeling and regulatory regimes. American Journal of Agricultural Economics, 86(1), 42-60.
18. GMO Compass. (2007, January 23). Labeled Goods Hard to Find. Retrieved February 2007 from: http://www.gmo-compass.org/eng/regulation/labelling/92. gmo_labelling_labelled_goods.html.
19. Gruère, G.P. (2006). A preliminary comparison of the retail level effects of labeling policies of genetically modified food in Canada and France. Food Policy, 31(2), 148-61.
20. Haigh, M. (2004). Handbook on the labeling of genetically modified foods, ingredients and additives. Surrey, UK: Leatherhead Food International.
21. Hansen, K. (2004). Does autonomy count in favor of labeling genetically modified food? Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics, 17(1), 67-76.
22. Heumueller, D., & Josling, T. (2004). Trade restrictions on genetically engineered foods: The application of the TBT agreement. In R.E. Evenson and V. Santaniello (Eds.), The Regulation of Agricultural Biotechnology (pp. 79-88). Cambridge, MA: CABI Publishing.
23. Hobbs, J.E., & Kerr, W.A. (2006). Consumer information, labeling, and international trade in agri-food products. Food Policy, 31(1), 78-89.
24. Huang, J., Deliang, Z., Yang, J., Rozelle, S., & Kalaitzandonakes, N. (2006). The costs of implementing the Biosafety Protocol - A look at China (IPC Technology Issue Brief 17). Washington, DC: International Food and Agricultural Trade Policy Council.
25. Jaeger, W.K. (2002, October). Economics issues and Oregon ballot measure 27: Labeling of genetically modified foods (EM 8817). Corvallis, Oregon: Oregon State University.
26. Josling, T., Roberts, D., & Orden, D. (2004). Food regulation and trade, toward a safe and open global system. Washington, DC: Institute for International Economics.
27. JRG Consulting Group. (2004). Economic assessment of the ratification of the Cartagena Protocol, based on the outcome of the 1st meeting of parties. Final report prepared for Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada.
28. Kalaitzandonakes, N. (2004). The potential impacts of the Biosafety Protocol on agricultural commodity trade (IPC Technology Issue Brief). Washington, DC: International Food and Agricultural Trade Policy Council.
29. Kalaitzandonakes, N., & Bijman, J. (2003). Who is driving biotechnology acceptance? Nature Biotechnology, 21, 366-369.
30. Kaye-Blake, W., Bicknell, K., & Lamb, C. (2004). Willingness to pay for GM food labeling in New Zealand. In R.E. Evenson and V. Santaniello (Eds), Consumer Acceptance of Genetically Modified Food. Wallingford, UK: CABI Publishing.
31. Knight, J., Mather, D., & Holdsworth, D. (2005). Impact of genetic modification of country image of imported food products in European markets: Perceptions of channel members. Food Policy, 30(4), 385-398.
32. KPMG International. (2000a, January). Potential costs of mandatory labeling of food products derived from biotechnology in Canada.
33. KPMG International. (2000b, March). Report on the costs of labeling genetically modified foods.
34. Ledford, H. (2007). Out of Bounds. Nature, 445, 132-133.
35. Loureiro, M.L. & Hine, S. (2004). Preferences and willingness to pay for GM labeling policies. Food Policy, 29(5), 467-483.
36. Low, B. (2006, February 23). Interview: India may not change vigils duties in budget. Dow Jones Newswires.
37. Lusk, J.L., House, L.O., Valli, C., Jaeger, S.R., Moore, M., Morrow, B., & Traill, W.B. (2005). Consumer welfare effects of introducing and labeling genetically modified food. Economics Letters, 88(3), 382-388.
38. McKay White, K., & Veeman, M.M. (2007). A survey of literature on genetically modified crops: economics, ethics, and society (Staff Paper 07-01). Alberta, Canada: Department of Rural Economy, Faculty of Agriculture, Forestry and Home Economics, University of Alberta, Edmonton, Canada.
39. Marks, L., Kalaitzandonakes, N., & Vickner, S.S. (2004). Consumer purchasing behavior towards GM foods in the Netherlands. In R.E. Evenson and V. Santaniello (Eds), Consumer Acceptance of Biotechnology Foods. Wallingford, UK: CABI Publishing.
40. Morgan, D., & Goh, G. (2004). Genetically modified food labeling and the WTO agreements. Review of European Community and International Environmental Law, 13(3), 305-319.
41. National Economic Research Associates (NERA). (2001). Economic appraisal of options for extension of legislation on GM labeling: A final report for the Foods Standards Agency of the United Kingdom.
42. Noussair, C., Robin, S., & Ruffieux, B. (2002). Do consumers not care about biotech foods or do they just not read the labels? Economics Letters, 75(1), 47-53.
43. Noussair, C., Robin, S., & Ruffieux, B. (2004). Do consumers really refuse to buy genetically modified food? The Economic Journal, 114, 102-120.
44. Phillips, P.W.B., & Isaac, G.E. (1998). GMO labeling: Threat or opportunity? AgBioForum, 1(1), 25-30. Available on the World Wide Web: http://www.agbioforum.org.
45. Phillips, P.W.B., & McNeill, H. (2000). A survey of national labeling policies for GM foods. AgBioForum, 3(4), 219-224. Available on the World Wide Web: http://www.agbioforum.org.
46. Redick, T.P. (2007). The Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety: Precautionary priority in biotech crop approvals and containment of commodities shipments. Colorado Journal of International Environmental Law and Policy, 18(1), 73-75.
47. Runge, C.F., & Jackson, L.A. (2003). Labeling, trade and genetically modified organisms: A proposed solution. Journal of World Trade, 34(1), 111-122.
48. Sharma, A. (2007, March 7). Genetically modified food set to be labeled before import. Financial Express. Retrieved April 2007 from: http://www.financialexpress.com/fe_full_story.php?content_id=156917.
49. Sheldon, I. (2002). Regulation of biotechnology: Will we ever freely trade GMOs? European Review of Agricultural Economics, 29(1), 155-176.
50. Streiffer, R., & Rubel, A. (2003). Choice versus autonomy in the GM food labeling debate. AgBioForum, 6(3), 141-142. Available on the World Wide Web: http://www.agbioforum.org.
51. Tegene, A., Huffman, W., Rousu, M., & Shogren, J. (2003). The effects of information on consumer demand for biotech foods, evidence from experimental auctions (Technical Bulletin 1903). Washington, DC: United States Department of Agriculture Economic Research Service.
52. United States Department of Agriculture (USDA). (2006). Foreign Agricultural Service Attaché Reports for multiple countries. Retrieved January 2007 from http://www.fas.usda.gov/scriptsw/attacherep/default.asp.
53. Valceschini, E. (1998). OGM et alimentation: L'étiquetage obligatoire des aliments est-il la meilleure solution pour les consommateurs? [GMO and food: Is mandatory labelling of food the best solution for the consumers ?] Paris, France: Institut National de la Recherche Agronomique.
54. World Trade Organization. (2006). Notifications by WTO members to the SPS and TBT. Retrieved March 2006 from http://www.wto.org.
55. Wongruang, P. (2006, May 12). Labelling law fails Thai consumers. Bangkok Post.