IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/agrhuv/v30y2013i3p325-335.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Confronting coexistence in the United States: organic agriculture, genetic engineering, and the case of Roundup Ready ® alfalfa

Author

Listed:
  • Kristina Hubbard
  • Neva Hassanein

Abstract

In agriculture, the principle of coexistence refers to a condition where different primary production systems can exist in the vicinity of each other, and can be managed in such a way that they affect each other as little as possible. Coexistence policies aim to ensure that farmers are able to freely grow the crops they choose—be they genetically engineered (GE), non-GE conventional, or organic. In the United States (US), the issue of coexistence has very recently come into sharp relief with the introduction of Roundup Ready ® (RR) alfalfa, a landmark court decision in 2007 (Geertson v. Johanns), and subsequent governmental actions, including the first Environmental Impact Statement on a GE crop. By contrast, in 2003 the European Union (EU) created a policy to manage coexistence and to address economic harms that may be caused by contamination. We briefly review the EU framework as an instructive resource. This policy analysis then looks at the US organic industry and its standards with respect to GE before turning to the case of RR alfalfa. With a focus on the field trial stage and on environmental assessments prior to market approval, the case reveals numerous problems in the existing regulatory framework as it pertains to coexistence and prevention of contamination of organic products with GE material. The paper concludes with specific policy recommendations for creating a more robust coexistence policy in the US. Copyright Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2013

Suggested Citation

  • Kristina Hubbard & Neva Hassanein, 2013. "Confronting coexistence in the United States: organic agriculture, genetic engineering, and the case of Roundup Ready ® alfalfa," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 30(3), pages 325-335, September.
  • Handle: RePEc:spr:agrhuv:v:30:y:2013:i:3:p:325-335
    DOI: 10.1007/s10460-012-9394-6
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1007/s10460-012-9394-6
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s10460-012-9394-6?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
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. B. Deaton & John Hoehn, 2005. "The social construction of production externalities in contemporary agriculture: Process versus product standards as the basis for defining “organic”," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 22(1), pages 31-38, March.
    2. Michele Graziano Ceddia & Mark Bartlett & Caterina De Lucia & Charles Perrings, 2011. "On the regulation of spatial externalities: coexistence between GM and conventional crops in the EU and the ‘newcomer principle’," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 55(1), pages 126-143, January.
    3. Karen Klonsky, 2000. "Forces impacting the production of organic foods," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 17(3), pages 233-243, September.
    4. Glickman, Daniel R., 2000. "Remarks By U.S. Secretary Of Agriculture," Agricultural Outlook Forum 2000 33448, United States Department of Agriculture, Agricultural Outlook Forum.
    5. Ceddia, Michele Graziano & Bartlett, Mark & Lucia, Caterina De & Perrings, Charles, 2011. "On the regulation of spatial externalities: coexistence between GM and conventional crops in the EU and the ‘newcomer principle’," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 55(1), pages 1-18.
    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. Maciejczak, Mariusz, 2015. "Will the institution of coexistence be re-defined by TTIP?," GMCC-15: Seventh GMCC, November 17-20, 2015, Amsterdam, the Netherlands 211478, International Conference on Coexistence between Genetically Modified (GM) and non-GM based Agricultural Supply Chains (GMCC).
    2. Frédéric Goulet & Gabriela Giordano, 2017. "Searching for family farming in Argentina: chronicles of a technological innovation between two worlds," Review of Agricultural, Food and Environmental Studies, Springer, vol. 98(4), pages 233-253, December.

    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. Groeneveld, Rolf A. & Wesseler, Justus & Berentsen, Paul B.M., 2013. "Dominos in the dairy: An analysis of transgenic maize in Dutch dairy farming," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 86(C), pages 107-116.
    2. Yan Jin & Dušan Drabik, 2022. "CRISPR Rice vs conventional rice dilemma of a Chinese farmer," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 66(2), pages 424-446, April.
    3. Breustedt, Gunnar & Latacz-Lohmann, Uwe & Müller-Scheeßel, Jörg, 2013. "Impact of alternative information requirements on the coexistence of genetically modified (GM) and non-GM oilseed rape in the EU," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 93(C), pages 104-115.
    4. Veldstra, Michael D. & Alexander, Corinne E. & Marshall, Maria I., 2014. "To certify or not to certify? Separating the organic production and certification decisions," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 49(P2), pages 429-436.
    5. Joseph, Siny & Stephens, Greg, 2020. "Impact of “FarmStarts” on Mitigating Barriers of U.S. Organic Dairy Farming for Beginning Organic Dairy and Feed Producers in Twelve Mid-Western States," 2020 Annual Meeting, July 26-28, Kansas City, Missouri 304339, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    6. Ambec, Stefan & Langinier, Corinne & Marcoul, Philippe, 2011. "Spatial Efficiency of Genetically Modified and Organic Crops," LERNA Working Papers 11.18.352, LERNA, University of Toulouse.
    7. Anderson, Jamie B. & Jolly, Desmond A. & Green, Richard D., 2005. "Determinants of farmer adoption of organic production methods in the fresh-market produce sector in California: A logistic regression analysis," 2005 Annual Meeting, July 6-8, 2005, San Francisco, California 36319, Western Agricultural Economics Association.
    8. Templeton, Scott & Silberman, David & Yoo, Seung & Dabalen, Andrew, 2007. "Household use of Pesticides and Fertilizers For Pest-Soil Management and Own Time for Yard Work," Research Reports 187455, Clemson University, Department of Agricultural and Applied Economics.
    9. Costa, Leonardo & Sottomayor, Miguel & Ribeiro, Ricardo, 2005. "Conversion to Organic Farming in Mainland Portugal," 2005 International Congress, August 23-27, 2005, Copenhagen, Denmark 24490, European Association of Agricultural Economists.
    10. Klara Fischer & Camilla Eriksson, 2016. "Social Science Studies on European and African Agriculture Compared: Bringing Together Different Strands of Academic Debate on GM Crops," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 8(9), pages 1-17, August.
    11. Scott Templeton & David Zilberman & Seung Yoo & Andrew Dabalen, 2008. "Household Use of Agricultural Chemicals for Soil-Pest Management and Own Labor for Yard Work," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 40(1), pages 91-108, May.
    12. Hammond Wagner, Courtney & Cox, Michael & Bazo Robles, José Luis, 2016. "Pesticide lock-in in small scale Peruvian agriculture," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 129(C), pages 72-81.
    13. 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.
    14. Scott, Steffanie & Si, Zhenzhong & Schumilas, Theresa & Chen, Aijuan, 2014. "Contradictions in state- and civil society-driven developments in China’s ecological agriculture sector," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(C), pages 158-166.
    15. Nuray Cakirli Akyüz & Ludwig Theuvsen, 2020. "The Impact of Behavioral Drivers on Adoption of Sustainable Agricultural Practices: The Case of Organic Farming in Turkey," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(17), pages 1-20, August.
    16. Mattia C. Mancini & Kent Kovacs & Eric Wailes & Jennie Popp, 2016. "Addressing the Externalities from Genetically Modified Pollen Drift on a Heterogeneous Landscape," Land, MDPI, vol. 5(4), pages 1-18, October.
    17. Ariane Lotti, 2010. "The commoditization of products and taste: Slow Food and the conservation of agrobiodiversity," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 27(1), pages 71-83, March.
    18. John Cranfield & B. James Deaton & Shreenivas Shellikeri, 2009. "Evaluating Consumer Preferences for Organic Food Production Standards," Canadian Journal of Agricultural Economics/Revue canadienne d'agroeconomie, Canadian Agricultural Economics Society/Societe canadienne d'agroeconomie, vol. 57(1), pages 99-117, March.
    19. Raynolds, Laura T., 2004. "The Globalization of Organic Agro-Food Networks," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 32(5), pages 725-743, May.
    20. Ward, Ruby A. & Hunnicutt, Lynn & Keith, John E., 2004. "If You Can't Trust the Farmer, Who Can You Trust? The Effect of Certification Types on Purchases of Organic Produce," International Food and Agribusiness Management Review, International Food and Agribusiness Management Association, vol. 7(1), pages 1-18.

    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:spr:agrhuv:v:30:y:2013:i:3:p:325-335. 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    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.