Skevas, Theodoros and Wesseler, Justus and Fevereiro, Pedro (2009): Coping with ex-ante regulations for planting Bt maize: the Portuguese experience. Published in: AgBioForum , Vol. 12, No. 1 (January 2009): pp. 60-69.
Download (106kB) | Preview
This article investigates the attitude and practices of Bt and non-Bt maize farmers in Portugal. Thirty-seven Bt maize farmers were interviewed, representing 22.5% of the total number of Bt maize notifications in the country and 31.5% of the total area planted with Bt maize in 2007. Additionally, 66 non-Bt maize farmers were surveyed in an attempt to investigate their opinion on the Bt technology, its viability, and its future. The most interesting finding is that almost half of all the surveyed maize farmers stated that the ex-ante regulations are rigid and difficult to apply.
|Item Type:||MPRA Paper|
|Original Title:||Coping with ex-ante regulations for planting Bt maize: the Portuguese experience|
|Keywords:||agriculture; coexistence; Bt maize; Portugal; regulation|
|Subjects:||Q - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics > Q1 - Agriculture
L - Industrial Organization > L5 - Regulation and Industrial Policy > L51 - Economics of Regulation
O - Economic Development, Technological Change, and Growth > O1 - Economic Development > O13 - Agriculture; Natural Resources; Energy; Environment; Other Primary Products
O - Economic Development, Technological Change, and Growth > O3 - Technological Change; Research and Development; Intellectual Property Rights > O33 - Technological Change: Choices and Consequences; Diffusion Processes
O - Economic Development, Technological Change, and Growth > O3 - Technological Change; Research and Development; Intellectual Property Rights
|Depositing User:||Justus Wesseler|
|Date Deposited:||08. Sep 2011 13:43|
|Last Modified:||15. Feb 2013 20:10|
Beckmann V. & Wesseler, J. (2007). Spatial Dimension of Externalities and the Coase Theorem: Implications for Coexistence of Transgenic Crops. In W. Heijman (ed.) Regional Externalities. (pp. 215-234). Berlin: Springer.
Beckmann V., Soregaroli, C., & Wesseler, J. (2006a). Governing the coexistence of GM crops, ex-ante regulations and ex-post liability under uncertainty and irreversibility, ICAR Discussion Paper, 12/2006, Humboltd University, Berlin, Germany.
Beckmann V., Soregaroli, C., & Wesseler, J. (2006b). Coexistence Rules and Regulations in the European Union, American Journal of Agricultural Economics, 88(5): 1193-1199.
Breustedt, G., Müller-Scheeßel, J., & Latacz-Lohmann, U., (2008). Forecasting the Adoption of GM Oilseed Rape: Evidence from a Discrete Choice Experiment in Germany. Journal of Agricultural Economics, 59(2): 237-256.
Commission Staff Working Document, (2006). Annex to the Communication from the Commission to the Council and the European Parliament, Report on the Implementation of National Measures on the Coexistence of Genetically Modified Crops with the Conventional and Organic Farming, Brussels, Belgium.
Commission of the European Communities (2003). 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. OJEU L189/36-47, 29.7.2003, Brussels, Belgium. Available on the World Wide Web: <http://ec.europa.eu/agriculture/publi/reports/coexistence2/guide_en.pdf>.
Consmüller, N., Beckmann, V., & Schleyer, C. (2009). The Role of Coordination and Cooperation for Growing GM-Crops. The Case of Bt-Maize in Brandenburg, Germany. AgBioForum, 12(2): ????.
Demont, M., Daems, W., Dillen, K., Mathijs, E., Sausse, C., & Tollens, E. (2007). Regulating Coexistence in Europe: Beware of the Domino-Effect! Ecological Economics, 64(4): 683-689.
Devos, Y., Thas, O., Cougnon, M., De Clercq, E.M., Cordemans, K., & Reheul, D. (2008a). Feasibility of Isolation Perimeters for Genetically Modified Maize. Agronomy for Sustainable Development, 28(2): 195-206.
Devos, Y., Demont M., & Sanvido, O, (2008b). Coexistence in the EU-Return of the Moratorioum on GM Crops? Nature Biotechnology, 26(11): 1223-1255
EuropaBio (2007). Biotech Cultivation in Europe. Press briefing, International Press Center, 29 October, Brussels.
EUROPOL (2008). TE-SAT 2008 EU Terrorism and trend report 2008. Europol: The Hague.
Fevereiro M. P., (2006, June). GM Crops in Europe: Plantings and Benefits for Portugal. ICABR 10th International Conference, Ravello, Italy.
Gomez-Barbero, M., Berbel. J., and Rodriguez-Cerezo, E., (2008). Bt-corn in Spain-The Performance of the EU’s First GM Crop. Nature Biotechnology, 26(4): 384-386.
James C., (2006). Global Status of Commercialized Biotech/GM Crops: 2006, ISAAA, Executive Summary, BRIEF 35.
Messean A., Angevin, F., Gomez-Barbero, M., Menrad, K., & Rodriguez-Cerezo, E. (2006). New Case Studies on the Coexistence of GM and non-GM Crops in European Agriculture, Technical Report No. EUR 22102 EN. European Communities, Seville, Spain.
Sanvido, O., Widmer, F., Winzeler, M., Streit, B., Szerencsits, E., & Bigler, F. (2008). Definition and Feasibility of Isolation Distances for Transgenic Maize Cultivation. Transgenic Research, 17(3): 317-335.
Skevas, T. (2008). Environmental Regulations and Agriculture Production. The Case of Bt-corn Production in Portugal. M.Sc.-thesis, Wageningen University.
Smyth S., Khachatourians, G.G., & Philips, P. W.B. (2002). Liabilities and Economics of Transgenic Crops, Nature Biotechnology, 20(6): 537-541.
Soregaroli, C. & Wesseler, J., (2005). Minimum distance requirements and liability: implications for co-existence. In J. Wesseler (ed.): Environmental Costs and Benefits of Transgenic Crops.(pp. 165-182). Dordrecht, NL: Springer.
Wesseler, J., Scatasta, S., & Nillesen, E. (2007). The Maximum Incremental Social Tolerable Irreversible Costs (MISTICs) and other Benefits and Costs of Introducing Transgenic Maize in the EU-15. Pedobiologia, 51(3):261-269.
Wiel, C.C.M. van de, and Lotz, L.A.P., (2006). Outcrossing and Coexistence of Genetically Modified with (Genetically) Unmodified Crops: A Case Study of the Situation in The Netherlands. Netherlands Journal of Agricultural Science, 54(1): 17-35.