On the proportionality of EU spatial ex ante coexistence regulations

Food Policy

Volumn 34, Issue 6, 2009, Pages 508-518

  Demont, Matty ^a,b   Dillen, Koen ^b   Daems, Wim ^b   Sausse, Christophe ^c   Tollens, Eric ^b   Mathijs, Erik ^b  

^a Centre du riz pour l'Afrique Senegal   (Senegal)

^b UNIVERSITY OF LEUVEN   (Belgium)

^c Centre de Grignon   (France)

Author keywords

Biotechnology; GIS; Opportunity costs; Policy analysis; Shadow factor

Indexed keywords

BIOTECHNOLOGY; EMPIRICAL ANALYSIS; EUROPEAN UNION; FOOD POLICY; GENETICALLY MODIFIED ORGANISM; GIS; POLICY ANALYSIS; POLICY IMPLEMENTATION; POLICY MAKING; REGULATORY FRAMEWORK;

EID: 70350367528     PISSN: 03069192     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.foodpol.2009.04.003     Document Type: Article

References (71)

1. Alexander C., Fernandez-Cornejo J., and Goodhue R.E. Determinants of GMO use: a survey of Iowa corn-soybean farmers' acreage allocation. In: Santaniello V., Evenson R.E., and Zilberman D. (Eds). Market Development for Genetically Modified Foods (2002), CAB International, Wallingford 127-139
2. Allen D.W., and Lueck D. The nature of the farm. Journal of Law and Economics 41 2 (1998) 343-386
3. Beckmann V., and Wesseler J. Spatial dimension of externalities and the Coase theorem: implications for co-existence of transgenic crops. In: Heijman W. (Ed). Regional Externalities (2007), Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg, New York 223-242
4. Beckmann V., Soregaroli C., and Wesseler J. Coexistence rules and regulations in the European Union. American Journal of Agricultural Economics 88 5 (2006) 1193-1199
5. Belcher K., Nolan J., and Phillips P.W.B. Genetically modified crops and agricultural landscapes: spatial patterns of contamination. Ecological Economics 53 (2005) 387-401
6. Breustedt G., Muller-Scheessel J., and Latacz-Lohmann U. Forecasting the adoption of GM oilseed rape: evidence from a discrete choice experiment in Germany. Journal of Agricultural Economics 59 2 (2008) 237-256
7. Ceddia M.G., Bartlett M., and Perrings C. Landscape gene flow, coexistence and threshold effect: the case of genetically modified herbicide tolerant oilseed rape (Brassica napus). Ecological Modelling 205 1-2 (2007) 169-180
8. Ceddia M.G., Bartlett M., and Perrings C. Quantifying the effect of buffer zones, crop areas and spatial aggregation on the externalities of genetically modified crops at landscape level. Agriculture, Ecosystems and Environment 129 1-3 (2009) 65-72
9. Colbach N., Monod H., and Lavigne C. A simulation study of the medium-term effects of field patterns on cross-pollination rates in oilseed rape (Brassica napus L.). Ecological Modelling 220 5 (2009) 662-672
10. Consmüller N., Beckmann V., and Schleyer C. The role of coordination and cooperation in early adoption of GM crops: the case of Bt maize in Brandenburg, Germany. AgBioForum 12 1 (2009) 47-59
11. Copeland J.E., and Kasamba E. Economics of coexistence measures of GM and conventional crops: oilseed rape in fife (Scotland). In: Stein A.J., and Rodríguez-Cerezo E. (Eds). Third International Conference on Coexistence between Genetically Modified (GM) and Non-GM based Agricultural Supply Chains, Seville (Spain), 20-21 November 2007 (2007), Office for Official Publications of the European Communities, Luxembourg 149-152 (Book of Abstracts)
12. Crowley, L., Germany enables easier GM cultivation. (29.01.08).
13. Damgaard C., and Kjellsson G. Gene flow of oilseed rape (Brassica napus) according to isolation distance and buffer zone. Agriculture, Ecosystems and Environment 108 (2005) 291-301
14. Della Porta G., Ederle D., Bucchini L., Prandi M., Verderio A., and Pozzi C. Maize pollen mediated gene flow in the Po valley (Italy): source-recipient distance and effect of flowering time. European Journal of Agronomy 28 (2008) 255-265
15. Demont M., and Devos Y. Regulating coexistence of GM and non-GM crops without jeopardizing economic incentives. Trends in Biotechnology 26 7 (2008) 353-358
16. Demont M., and Tollens E. First impact of biotechnology in the EU: Bt maize adoption in Spain. Annals of Applied Biology 145 2 (2004) 197-207
17. Demont M., Wesseler J., and Tollens E. Biodiversity versus transgenic sugar beet: the one Euro question. European Review of Agricultural Economics 31 1 (2004) 1-18
18. Demont M., Wesseler J., and Tollens E. Irreversible costs and benefits of transgenic crops: what are they?. In: Wesseler J. (Ed). Environmental Costs and Benefits of Transgenic Crops (2005), Springer, Dordrecht, NL 113-122
19. Demont M., Dillen K., Mathijs E., and Tollens E. GM crops in Europe: how much value and for whom?. EuroChoices 6 3 (2007) 46-53
20. Demont M., Cerovska M., Daems W., Dillen K., Fogarasi J., Mathijs E., Muška F., Soukup J., and Tollens E. Ex ante impact assessment under imperfect information: biotechnology in new member states of the EU. Journal of Agricultural Economics 59 3 (2008) 463-486
21. Demont M., Daems W., Dillen K., Mathijs E., Sausse C., and Tollens E. Regulating coexistence in Europe: beware of the domino-effect!. Ecological Economics 64 4 (2008) 683-689
22. Devos Y., Reheul D., De Schrijver A., Cors F., and Moens W. Management of herbicide-tolerant oilseed rape in Europe: a case study on minimizing vertical gene flow. Environmental Biosafety Research 3 3 (2004) 135-148
23. Devos Y., Reheul D., and De Schrijver A. The co-existence between transgenic and non-transgenic maize in the European Union: a focus on pollen flow and cross-fertilization. Environmental Biosafety Research 4 2 (2005) 71-87
24. Devos Y., Reheul D., Thas O., De Clercq E., Cougnon M., and Cordemand K. Implementing isolation perimeters around genetically modified maize fields. Agronomy for Sustainable Development 27 (2007) 155-165
25. Devos Y., Demont M., and Sanvido O. Coexistence in the EU - return of the moratorium on GM crops?. Nature Biotechnology 26 11 (2008) 1223-1225
26. Devos Y., Thas O., Cougnon M., De Clercq E., Cordemans K., and Reheul D. Feasibility of isolation perimeters for genetically modified maize on an intra-regional scale in Flanders. Agronomy for Sustainable Development 28 (2008)
27. Dillen, K., Demont, M., Tollens, E., 2008. Modelling heterogeneity to estimate the ex ante value of biotechnology innovations. In: Proceedings from the 12th EAAE (European Association of Agricultural Economists) Congress, Ghent, 26-29 August 2008.
28. Dolezel M., Pascher K., and Grabherr G. Regionality as a key parameter for co-existence of genetically modified maize with conventional and organic maize. In: Messéan A. (Ed). Proceedings of the 2nd International Conference on Co-existence between GM and Non-GM based Agricultural Supply Chains (2005), Agropolis Productions, Montpellier 203-206
29. Eastham, K., Sweet, J., 2002. Genetically Modified Organisms (GMOs): The Significance of Gene Flow through Pollen Transfer. European Environment Agency, Copenhagen, Denmark, Environmental Issue Report No. 28.
30. EC. Commission recommendation of 23 July 2003 on guidelines for the development of national strategies and best practices to ensure the coexistence of genetically modified crops with conventional and organic farming. Official Journal of the European Communities L189 (2003) 36-47
31. EC, 9-3-2006. Report on the Implementation of National Measures on the Coexistence of Genetically Modified Crops with Conventional and Organic Farming. Commission of the European Communities, Brussels, Communication from the Commission to the Council and the European Parliament No. 104.
32. Emiliou N. Principle of proportionality. European Law: A Comparative Study (1996), Kluwer Law International, London
33. Falck-Zepeda J.B. Coexistence, genetically modified biotechnologies and biosafety: implications for developing countries. American Journal of Agricultural Economics 88 5 (2006) 1200-1208
34. Feder G., Just R.E., and Zilberman D. Adoption of agricultural innovations in developing countries: a survey. Economic Development and Cultural Change 33 2 (1985) 255-298
35. Foster, M., French, S., 2007. Market Acceptance of GM Canola. Australian Bureau of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Canberra, ABARE Research Report No. 07.5.
36. Furtan W.H., Guzel A., and Weseen A.S. Landscape clubs: co-existence of genetically modified and organic crops. Canadian Journal of Agricultural Economics 55 2 (2007) 185-195
37. Gómez-Barbero M., Berbel J., and Rodríguez-Cerezo E. Bt corn in Spain - the performance of the EU's first GM crop. Nature Biotechnology 26 (2008) 384-386
38. Gonzalez X.P., Alvarez C.J., and Crecente R. Evaluation of land distributions with joint regard to plot size and shape. Agricultural Systems 82 1 (2004) 31-43
39. Gustafson D.I., Brants I.O., Horak M.J., Remund K.M., Rosenbaum E.W., and Soteres J.K. Empirical modeling of genetically modified maize grain production practices to achieve European Union labeling thresholds. Crop Science 46 (2006) 2133-2140
40. He H., Dezonia B., and Mladenoff D. An aggregation index (AI) to quantify spatial patterns of landscapes. Landscape Ecology 15 7 (2000) 591-601
41. Hennessy D.A., and Moschini G. Regulatory actions under adjustment costs and the resolution of scientific uncertainty. American Journal of Agricultural Economics 88 2 (2006) 308-323
42. Hoyle M., and Cresswell J.E. The effect of wind direction on cross-pollination in wind-pollinated GM crops. Ecological Applications 17 4 (2007) 1234-1243
43. Hüsken A., and Dietz-Pfeilstetter A. Pollen-mediated intraspecific gene flow from herbicide resistant oilseed rape (Brassica napus L.). Transgenic Research 16 (2007) 557-569
44. Hüsken A., Ammann K., Messeguer J., Papa R., Robson P., Schiemann J., Squire G., Stamp P., Sweet J., and Wilhelm R. A major European synthesis of data on pollen and seed mediated gene flow in maize in the SIGMEA project. In: Stein A.J., and Rodríguez-Cerezo E. (Eds). Third International Conference on Coexistence between Genetically Modified (GM) and Non-GM based Agricultural Supply Chains, Seville (Spain), 20-21 November 2007 (2007), Office for Official Publications of the European Communities, Luxembourg 53-56 (Book of Abstracts)
45. Lapan H.E., and Moschini G. Incomplete adoption of a superior innovation. Economica 67 (2000) 525-542
46. Lapan H.E., and Moschini G. Innovation and trade with endogenous market failure: the case of genetically modified products. American Journal of Agricultural Economics 86 3 (2004) 634-648
47. Loureiro I., Escorial M.C., García-Baudín J.M., and Chueca M.C. Evidence of natural hybridization between Aegilops geniculata and wheat under field conditions in central Spain. Environmental Biosafety Research 5 (2006) 105-109
48. Marra M.C., and Piggott N.E. The value of non-pecuniary characteristics of crop biotechnologies: a new look at the evidence. In: Just R.E., Alston J.M., and Zilberman D. (Eds). Regulating Agricultural Biotechnology: Economics and Policy (2006), Springer, New York 145-177
49. Messéan, A., Angevin, F., Gómez-Barbero, M., Menrad, K., Rodríguez-Cerezo, E., 2006. New Case Studies on the Coexistence of GM and Non-GM Crops in European Agriculture. European Communities, Luxembourg, Technical Report No. EUR 22102 EN.
50. Messéan A., Sausse C., Gasquez J., and Darmency H. Occurrence of genetically modified oilseed rape seeds in the harvest of subsequent conventional oilseed rape over time. European Journal of Agronomy 27 (2007) 115-122
51. Messeguer J., Peñas G., Ballester J., Bas M., Serra J., Salvia J., Palaudelmàs M., and Melé E. Pollen-mediated gene flow in maize in real situations of coexistence. Plant Biotechnology Journal 4 (2006) 633-645
52. Moschini G., Bulut H., and Cembalo L. On the segregation of genetically modified, conventional, and organic products in European agriculture: a multi-market equilibrium analysis. Journal of Agricultural Economics 56 3 (2005) 347-372
53. Müller D. Geschwindigkeit als Unfallursache. Zeitschrift für die Praxis des Verkehrsjuristen 1 (2007) 1-6
54. Munro A. The spatial impact of genetically modified crops. Ecological Economics 67 4 (2008) 658-666
55. Oehmke J.F., and Wolf C.A. Why is Monsanto leaving money on the table? Monopoly pricing and technology valuation distributions with heterogeneous adopters. Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics 36 3 (2004) 705-718
56. ORAMA, 2007. GM maize in the field: conclusive results. .
57. Perry J.N. Sensitive dependencies and separation distances for genetically modified herbicide-tolerant crops. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London Series B: Biological Sciences 269 (2002) 1173-1176
58. Pessel F.D., Lecomte J., Emeriau V., Krouti M., Messéan A., and Gouyon P.H. Persistence of oilseed rape (Brassica napus L.) outside of cultivated fields. Theoretical and Applied Genetics 102 6-7 (2001) 841-846
59. Pla M., La Paz J.-L., Peñas G., García N., Palaudelmàs M., Esteve T., Messeguer J., and Melé E. Assessment of real-time PCR based methods for quantification of pollen-mediated gene flow from GM to conventional maize in a field study. Transgenic Research 15 (2006) 219-228
60. Sanvido O., Widmer F., Winzeler M., Streit B., Szerencsits E., and Bigler F. Definition and feasibility of isolation distances for transgenic maize cultivation. Transgenic Research 17 3 (2008) 317-335
61. Sausse, C., 2005. Case Study Beauce/Rapeseed. SIGMEA Project, Grignon. SIGMEA Deliverables Workpackage 7.1.
62. Scatasta S., Wesseler J., and Demont M. Irreversibility, uncertainty, and the adoption of transgenic crops: experiences from applications to HT sugar beets, HT corn and Bt corn. In: Just R.E., Alston J.M., and Zilberman D. (Eds). Regulating Agricultural Biotechnology: Economics and Policy (2006), Springer, New York 327-352
63. Skevas T., Wesseler J., and Fevereiro P. Coping with ex-ante regulations for planting Bt maize - The Portuguese experience. AgBioForum 12 1 (2009) 60-69
64. Stein A.J., and Rodríguez-Cerezo E. Third International Conference on Coexistence between Genetically Modified (GM) and Non-GM based Agricultural Supply Chains, Seville (Spain), 20-21 November 2007 (2007), Office for Official Publications of the European Communities, Luxembourg (Book of Abstracts)
65. Sunding D.L., and Zilberman D. The agricultural innovation process: research and technology adoption in a changing agricultural sector. In: Gardner B.L., and Rausser G.C. (Eds). Handbook of Agricultural Economics vol. 1 (2001), Elsevier, Amsterdam 207-261
66. Van De Wiel C.C.M., and Lotz L.A.P. Outcrossing and coexistence of genetically modified with (genetically) unmodified crops: a case study of the situation in The Netherlands. NJAS Wageningen Journal of Life Sciences 54 1 (2006) 17-35
67. Weaver R.D. R&D incentives for GM seeds: restricted monopoly, non-market effects, and regulation. In: Evenson R.E., and Santaniello V. (Eds). The Regulation of Agricultural Biotechnology (2004), CAB International, Wallingford, UK 143-151
68. Weaver R.D., and Wesseler J. Monopolistic pricing power for transgenic crops when technology adopters face irreversible benefits and costs. Applied Economics Letters 11 (2004) 969-973
69. Weber W.E., Bringezu T., Broer I., Eder J., and Holz F. Coexistence between GM and non-GM maize crops - tested in 2004 at the field scale level (Erprobungsanbau 2004). Journal of Agronomy and Crop Science 193 2 (2007) 79-92
70. Weekes R., Allnutt T., Boffey C., Morgan S., Bilton M., Daniels R., and Henry C. A study of crop-to-crop gene flow using farm scale sites of fodder maize (Zea mays L.) in the UK. Transgenic Research 16 (2007) 203-211
71. Wesseler J., Scatasta S., and Nillesen E. The maximum incremental social tolerable irreversible costs (MISTICs) and other benefits and costs of introducing transgenic maize in the EU-15. Pedobiologia 51 (2007) 261-269