IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ags/aaea13/150397.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Adoption and Coexistence of GE, Conventional non-GE, and Organic Crops

Author

Listed:
  • Adalja, Aaron
  • Greene, Catherine
  • Hanson, James
  • Ebel, Robert
  • Barron, Michael

Abstract

No abstract is available for this item.

Suggested Citation

  • Adalja, Aaron & Greene, Catherine & Hanson, James & Ebel, Robert & Barron, Michael, 2013. "Adoption and Coexistence of GE, Conventional non-GE, and Organic Crops," 2013 Annual Meeting, August 4-6, 2013, Washington, D.C. 150397, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    • Handle: RePEc:ags:aaea13:150397
    DOI: 10.22004/ag.econ.150397
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/150397/files/Poster_2850_AAEA_Adalja_etal_2013_0729.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.22004/ag.econ.150397?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. Bullock, D. S. & Desquilbet, M., 2002. "The economics of non-GMO segregation and identity preservation," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 27(1), pages 81-99, February.
    2. Greene, Catherine R. & Dimitri, Carolyn & Lin, Biing-Hwan & McBride, William D. & Oberholtzer, Lydia & Smith, Travis A., 2009. "Emerging Issues in the U.S. Organic Industry," Economic Information Bulletin 58617, United States Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service.
    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. Konduru, Srinivasa & Kalaitzandonakes, Nicholas G. & Magnier, Alexandre, 2009. "GMO Testing Strategies and Implications for Trade: A Game Theoretic Approach," 2009 Annual Meeting, July 26-28, 2009, Milwaukee, Wisconsin 49594, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    2. Anne-Célia Disdier & Lionel Fontagné, 2010. "Trade impact of European measures on GMOs condemned by the WTO panel," Review of World Economics (Weltwirtschaftliches Archiv), Springer;Institut für Weltwirtschaft (Kiel Institute for the World Economy), vol. 146(3), pages 495-514, September.
    3. Munasib, Abdul B.A. & Jordan, Jeffrey L., 2011. "The Effect of Social Capital on the Choice to Use Sustainable Agricultural Practices," Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics, Southern Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 43(2), pages 1-15, May.
    4. Demont, Matty & Daems, W. & Dillen, Koen & Mathijs, Erik & Sausse, C. & Tollens, Eric, 2008. "Economics of spatial coexistence of genetically modified and conventional crops: Oilseed rape in Central France," 2008 International Congress, August 26-29, 2008, Ghent, Belgium 43650, European Association of Agricultural Economists.
    5. 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.
    6. Mario F. Teisl & Julie A. Caswell, 2003. "Information Policy and Genetically Modified Food: Weighting the Benefits and Costs," QA - Rivista dell'Associazione Rossi-Doria, Associazione Rossi Doria, issue 4, March.
    7. Kalaitzandonakes, Nicholas & Lusk, Jayson & Magnier, Alexandre, 2018. "The price of non-genetically modified (non-GM) food," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 78(C), pages 38-50.
    8. Nielsen, Chantal Pohl & Robinson, Sherman & Thierfelder, Karen, 2002. "Trade in genetically modified food: A survey of empirical studies," TMD discussion papers 106, International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI).
    9. GianCarlo Moschini, 2008. "Biotechnology and the development of food markets: retrospect and prospects," European Review of Agricultural Economics, Oxford University Press and the European Agricultural and Applied Economics Publications Foundation, vol. 35(3), pages 331-355, September.
    10. An, Henry & Pouliot, Sebastien & Volpe, Richard J., III, 2012. "Local, Organic, Inexpensive and Safe: Can Large Retailers Do It All?," 2012 Annual Meeting, August 12-14, 2012, Seattle, Washington 124754, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    11. Coléno, F.C. & Angevin, F. & Lécroart, B., 2009. "A model to evaluate the consequences of GM and non-GM segregation scenarios on GM crop placement in the landscape and cross-pollination risk management," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 101(1-2), pages 49-56, June.
    12. Troy G. Schmitz & Andrew Schmitz & Charles B. Moss, 2005. "The economic impact of StarLink corn," Agribusiness, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 21(3), pages 391-407.
    13. Gawron, Jana-Christina & Theuvsen, Ludwig, 2007. "Costs of Processing Genetically Modified Organisms: Analysis of the Rapeseed and Corn Industries," 47th Annual Conference, Weihenstephan, Germany, September 26-28, 2007 7601, German Association of Agricultural Economists (GEWISOLA).
    14. Goldsmith, Peter D. & Bender, Karen, 2003. "Ten Conversations about Identity Preservation: Implications for Cooperatives," 2003 Annual Meeting, October 29 31803, NCERA-194 Research on Cooperatives.
    15. Cadot, Olivier & Suwa-Eisenmann, Akiko & Traça, Daniel, 2003. "OGM et relations commerciales transatlantiques," Cahiers d'Economie et de Sociologie Rurales (CESR), Institut National de la Recherche Agronomique (INRA), vol. 68.
    16. Kentaka Aruga, 2014. "An intervention analysis on the Tokyo Grain Exchange non-genetically modified and conventional soybean futures markets," Cogent Economics & Finance, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 2(1), pages 1-11, December.
    17. D.S. Bullock, 2001. "Who pays the costs of non-GMO segregation and identity preservation ?," Post-Print hal-02283458, HAL.
    18. GianCarlo Moschini & Harun Bulut & Luigi Cembalo, 2005. "On the Segregation of Genetically Modified, Conventional and Organic Products in European Agriculture: A Multi‐market Equilibrium Analysis," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 56(3), pages 347-372, December.
    19. 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.
    20. Zhu, Manhong & Schmitz, Andrew & Schmtiz, Troy G., 2016. "Why Has not Genetically Modified Wheat Been Commercialized: A Game Theoretical Perspective," 2016 Annual Meeting, February 6-9, 2016, San Antonio, Texas 230796, Southern Agricultural Economics Association.

    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:aaea13:150397. 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/aaeaaea.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.