IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ags/ubfred/18775.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Das neue Gentechnikgesetz - ein Gentechnikverhinderungsgesetz?

Author

Listed:
  • Becker, Alexander
  • Holm-Muller, Karin

Abstract

In addition to existing juridical analyses of the new German act for genetic engineering, this article deals with an environmental economic assessment. It is examined what kind of external costs will arise by using/applying genetic engineering and how they will be allocated. Our focus is on the costs that explicitly evolve from the societal postulated coexistence of conventional/ organic farms and users of biotechnology. If the protection of the existing production is accepted, as postulated by politics, the new act internalizes the so called market losses relatively well. In this context, the design of precautionary duties that have to be still established by law is of utmost importance. To avoid the dangers of an excessive liability by the farmer, it is from an economic point of view a good alternative, if the producers of genetically modified crops take the responsibility for any litigation claims to farmers. Furthermore negotiations between neighbouring farms could be an option to keep the costs for damage prevention to a minimum. Erganzend zu den bereits vorliegenden juristischen Analysen des neuen deutschen Gentechnikgesetzes beschaftigt sich der vorliegende Artikel mit einer umweltokonomischen Beurteilung. Untersucht wird, welche externen Kosten bei der Nutzung der "Grunen Gentechnik" entstehen und wie sie auf die Beteiligten verteilt werden. Dabei liegt der Fokus auf den Kosten, die explizit fur die gesellschaftlich geforderte Koexistenz von konventionellen/ okologischen Betrieben und Nutzern der Gentechnik entstehen. Wird der politisch gesetzte estandsschutz fur die bestehenden Produktionssysteme akzeptiert, so zeigt sich, dass eine korrekte Internalisierung der so genannten Vermarktungsschaden relativ gut erreicht werden kann. In diesem Zusammenhang spielt jedoch die Ausgestaltung der Vorsorgepflichten, die noch in einer Rechtsverordnung zur Guten fachlichen Praxis festgeschrieben warden mussen, eine erhebliche Rolle. Um der Gefahr einer Ubermasshaftung durch Landwirte zu begegnen, ist aus okonomischer Sicht die Haftungsubernahme durch die Hersteller der gentechnisch veranderten Pflanzen eine gute Moglichkeit. Auch bieten sich Verhandlungslosungen zwischen benachbarten Landwirten an, um eine kostenminimale Vermeidung von Schaden zu erreichen. Schlusselworter : gentechnikgesetz, haftung, koexistenz, vermarktungsschaden

Suggested Citation

  • Becker, Alexander & Holm-Muller, Karin, 2005. "Das neue Gentechnikgesetz - ein Gentechnikverhinderungsgesetz?," Discussion Papers 18775, University of Bonn, Institute for Food and Resource Economics.
  • Handle: RePEc:ags:ubfred:18775
    DOI: 10.22004/ag.econ.18775
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/18775/files/dp050002.pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.22004/ag.econ.18775?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. R. H. Coase, 2013. "The Problem of Social Cost," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 56(4), pages 837-877.
    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. John Lynham, 2012. "Ecomarkets For Conservation And Sustainable Development in the Coastal Zone," Working Papers 201218, University of Hawaii at Manoa, Department of Economics.
    2. Mason, Susan G. & Holley, Don & Wells, Aaron & Jain, Amit & Wuerzer, Thomas & Joshi, Alark, 2016. "An experiment-based methodology to understand the dynamics of group decision making," Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 56(C), pages 14-26.
    3. Wunder, Sven, 2015. "Revisiting the concept of payments for environmental services," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 117(C), pages 234-243.
    4. Mondello, Gérard, 2015. "Splitting nuclear parks or not? The third party liability role," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 51(C), pages 553-559.
    5. Yew-Kwang Ng, 2016. "Are Unrealistic Assumptions/Simplifications Acceptable? Some Methodological Issues in Economics," Pacific Economic Review, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 21(2), pages 180-201, May.
    6. Franklin G. Mixon & Chandini Sankaran, 2019. "Men in Grey Suits: Shark Activity and Congestion of the Surfing Commons," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(11), pages 1-15, June.
    7. Jenkins, Jesse D., 2014. "Political economy constraints on carbon pricing policies: What are the implications for economic efficiency, environmental efficacy, and climate policy design?," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 69(C), pages 467-477.
    8. Sébastien Foudi, 2012. "Exploitation of soil biota ecosystem services in agriculture: a bioeconomic approach," Working Papers 2012-02, BC3.
    9. Persson, Torsten & Tabellini, Guido, 2002. "Political economics and public finance," Handbook of Public Economics, in: A. J. Auerbach & M. Feldstein (ed.), Handbook of Public Economics, edition 1, volume 3, chapter 24, pages 1549-1659, Elsevier.
    10. christoph Engel, 2005. "Voice over IP. Competition Policy and Regulation," Discussion Paper Series of the Max Planck Institute for Research on Collective Goods 2005_26, Max Planck Institute for Research on Collective Goods.
    11. Marco Bisogno, 2012. "The Accessibility Of The Italian Bankruptcy Procedures: An Empirical Analysis," Eurasian Business Review, Springer;Eurasia Business and Economics Society, vol. 2(2), pages 1-24, December.
    12. Fikret Adaman & Yahya M. Madra, 2012. "Understanding Neoliberalism as Economization: The Case of the Ecology," Working Papers 2012/04, Bogazici University, Department of Economics.
    13. Maite Cubas‐Díaz & Miguel Ángel Martínez Sedano, 2018. "Measures for Sustainable Investment Decisions and Business Strategy – A Triple Bottom Line Approach," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 27(1), pages 16-38, January.
    14. Baumann, Florian, 2015. "Freier Warenverkehr und unverfälschter Wettbewerb in der Europäischen Union: Der Beitrag der europäischen Produkthaftung," DICE Ordnungspolitische Perspektiven 75, Heinrich Heine University Düsseldorf, Düsseldorf Institute for Competition Economics (DICE).
    15. Peter Boettke & John Kroencke, 2020. "The real purpose of the program: a case study in James M. Buchanan’s efforts at academic entrepreneurship to “save the books” in economics," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 183(3), pages 227-245, June.
    16. Qiuyue Xia & Lu Li & Jie Dong & Bin Zhang, 2021. "Reduction Effect and Mechanism Analysis of Carbon Trading Policy on Carbon Emissions from Land Use," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(17), pages 1-22, August.
    17. Alberto Battistini, 2008. "Micro-Founded Institutions and Macro-Founded Individuals: The Dual Nature of Profit," Department of Economics University of Siena 550, Department of Economics, University of Siena.
    18. Musso, Antonio & Rothengatter, Werner, 2013. "Internalisation of external costs of transport–A target driven approach with a focus on climate change," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 29(C), pages 303-314.
    19. Charles Rowley & Michael Webb, 2007. "Israel and Palestine: the slow road to peace or the fast track to mutual annihilation?," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 132(1), pages 7-26, July.
    20. Wang, Pu & Poe, Gregory L. & Wolf, Steven A., 2017. "Payments for Ecosystem Services and Wealth Distribution," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 132(C), pages 63-68.

    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:ubfred:18775. 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/zefbnde.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.