IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/ags/agreko/347970.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Food self-sufficiency and GM regulation under conflicting interests: the case of GM maize in South Africa

Author

Listed:
  • Shao, Qianqian
  • Drabik, Dusan
  • Gouse, Marnus
  • Wesseler, Justus

Abstract

Food self-sufficiency is an important contributor to food security, and one of the potential solutions to this problem is increased food production productivity through agricultural biotechnology. In this paper, we study the relationship between a country’s genetically modified (GM) food policy and the food self-sufficiency rate (SSR) under conflicting interests, with the example of GM crop regulation and GM maize production in South Africa. We develop a theoretical model of a small open economy and investigate the GM food policy as the outcome of a GM and a non-GM food groups’ lobbying game that follows the model of Grossman and Helpman. The government maximises its payoff by considering the weighted sum of social welfare and contributions from interest groups. Our findings suggest that a lower GM food regulation supports domestic agricultural production, and we offer potential reasons why a country that has a low SSR still has a strict GM food policy regulation. We also find that the food SSR is a biased measure of food availability when both production and consumption change simultaneously.

Suggested Citation

  • Shao, Qianqian & Drabik, Dusan & Gouse, Marnus & Wesseler, Justus, 2019. "Food self-sufficiency and GM regulation under conflicting interests: the case of GM maize in South Africa," Agrekon, Agricultural Economics Association of South Africa (AEASA), vol. 59(01), October.
    • Handle: RePEc:ags:agreko:347970
    DOI: 10.22004/ag.econ.347970
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/347970/files/Food%20self-sufficiency%20and%20GM%20regulation%20under%20conflicting%20interests%20%20the%20case%20of%20GM%20maize%20in%20South%20Africa.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.22004/ag.econ.347970?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. Vermeulen, Hester & Ndibongo Traub, Lulama & Meyer, Ferdinand H., 2009. "Impact Analysis Of Food Policy Response On Household Food Security: The Case Of South Africa’S Maize Subsector," 2009 Conference, August 16-22, 2009, Beijing, China 51396, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    2. Giovanni Maggi & Pinelopi Koujianou Goldberg, 1999. "Protection for Sale: An Empirical Investigation," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 89(5), pages 1135-1155, December.
    3. Josling, Timothy E. & Roberts, Donna & Orden, David, 2004. "Food Regulation And Trade: Toward A Safe And Open Global System -- An Overview And Synopsis," 2004 Annual meeting, August 1-4, Denver, CO 20008, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
    4. Regier, Gregory K & Dalton, Timothy J, 2014. "Labour savings of Roundup Ready maize: Impact on cost and input substitution for South African smallholders," African Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, African Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 9(3), pages 1-14, August.
    5. Ronald Herring & Robert Paarlberg, 2016. "The Political Economy of Biotechnology," Annual Review of Resource Economics, Annual Reviews, vol. 8(1), pages 397-416, October.
    6. Smart, Richard D. & Blum, Matthias & Wesseler, Justus, 2015. "EU Member States’ Voting for Authorizing Genetically Engineered Crops: a Regulatory Gridlock," German Journal of Agricultural Economics, Humboldt-Universitaet zu Berlin, Department for Agricultural Economics, vol. 64(04), December.
    7. Essi Eerola, 2004. "Forest Conservation – Too Much or Too Little? A Political Economy Model," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 27(4), pages 391-407, April.
    8. Lusk, Jayson L. & McFadden, Brandon R. & Wilson, Norbert, 2018. "Do consumers care how a genetically engineered food was created or who created it?," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 78(C), pages 81-90.
    9. David Zilberman & Ben Gordon & Gal Hochman & Justus Wesseler, 2018. "Economics of Sustainable Development and the Bioeconomy," Applied Economic Perspectives and Policy, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 40(1), pages 22-37.
    10. Wesseler, Justus & Zilberman, David, 2014. "The economic power of the Golden Rice opposition," Environment and Development Economics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 19(6), pages 724-742, December.
    11. Rosamond L. Naylor & Walter P. Falcon, 2010. "Food Security in an Era of Economic Volatility," Population and Development Review, The Population Council, Inc., vol. 36(4), pages 693-723, December.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Wenjing Zhang & Jianhong Xue & Henk Folmer & Khadim Hussain, 2019. "Perceived Risk of Genetically Modified Foods Among Residents in Xi’an, China: A Structural Equation Modeling Approach," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 16(4), pages 1-12, February.
    2. Vincent Smith & Justus H. H. Wesseler & David Zilberman, 2021. "New Plant Breeding Technologies: An Assessment of the Political Economy of the Regulatory Environment and Implications for Sustainability," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(7), pages 1-18, March.
    3. Castellari, Elena & Soregaroli, Claudio & Venus, Thomas J. & Wesseler, Justus, 2018. "Food processor and retailer non-GMO standards in the US and EU and the driving role of regulations," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 78(C), pages 26-37.
    4. Graham Mallard, 2014. "Static Common Agency And Political Influence: An Evaluative Survey," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 28(1), pages 17-35, February.
    5. Matin Qaim, 2020. "Role of New Plant Breeding Technologies for Food Security and Sustainable Agricultural Development," Applied Economic Perspectives and Policy, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 42(2), pages 129-150, June.
    6. Richard Danvers Smart & Matthias Blum & Justus Wesseler, 2016. "Trends in Genetically Engineered Crops' Approval Times in the United States and the European Union," Economics Working Papers 16-03, Queen's Management School, Queen's University Belfast.
    7. Richard D. Smart & Matthias Blum & Justus Wesseler, 2017. "Trends in Approval Times for Genetically Engineered Crops in the United States and the European Union," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 68(1), pages 182-198, February.
    8. Valerie Kilders & Vincenzina Caputo, 2021. "Is Animal Welfare Promoting Hornless Cattle? Assessing Consumer’s Valuation for Milk from Gene‐edited Cows under Different Information Regimes," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 72(3), pages 735-759, September.
    9. Paulo Ricardo S. Oliveira & Jose Maria F. J. da Silveira & David S. Bullock, 2020. "Innovation in GMOs, technological gap, demand lag, and trade," Agribusiness, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 36(1), pages 37-58, January.
    10. Adam, Antonis & Moutos, Thomas, 2011. "A politico-economic analysis of minimum wages and wage subsidies," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 110(3), pages 171-173, March.
    11. Jacob Wood & Gohar Feroz Khan, 2015. "International trade negotiation analysis: network and semantic knowledge infrastructure," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 105(1), pages 537-556, October.
    12. Bin, Sheng, 2000. "The Political Economy of Trade Policy in China," Working Papers 10/2000, Copenhagen Business School, Department of Management, Politics & Philosophy.
    13. Falck-Zepeda, Jose & Smyth, Stuart J. & Ludlow, Karinne, 2016. "Zen and the Art of Attaining Conceptual and Implementation Clarity: Socio-economic Considerations, Biosafety and Decision-making," Estey Centre Journal of International Law and Trade Policy, Estey Centre for Law and Economics in International Trade, vol. 17(2), pages 1-20, December.
    14. Guy Michaels & Xiaojia Zhi, 2010. "Freedom Fries," American Economic Journal: Applied Economics, American Economic Association, vol. 2(3), pages 256-281, July.
    15. Francois, Joseph & Nelson, Douglas & Pelkmans-Balaoing, Annette, 2008. "Endogenous Protection in General Equilibrium: Estimating Political Weights in the EU," CEPR Discussion Papers 6979, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    16. Nauro Campos & Francesco Giovannoni, 2007. "Lobbying, corruption and political influence," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 131(1), pages 1-21, April.
    17. Adao, Rodrigo & Costinot, Arnaud & Donaldson, Dave & Sturm Becko, John, 2023. "Why is Trade Not Free? A Revealed Preference Approach," CEPR Discussion Papers 18567, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    18. David De Remer, 2013. "The Evolution of International Subsidy Rules," Working Papers ECARES ECARES 2013-45, ULB -- Universite Libre de Bruxelles.
    19. Adelino, Manuel & Dinc, I. Serdar, 2014. "Corporate distress and lobbying: Evidence from the Stimulus Act," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 114(2), pages 256-272.
    20. Julien Vauday, 2008. "Heterogeneous lobbying efficiency," Documents de travail du Centre d'Economie de la Sorbonne bla08053, Université Panthéon-Sorbonne (Paris 1), Centre d'Economie de la Sorbonne.

    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:agreko:347970. 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/aeasaea.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.