Are EU spatial ex ante coexistence regulations proportional? (original) (raw)
Related papers
On the proportionality of EU spatial ex ante coexistence regulations
Food Policy, 2009
The EU is currently struggling to implement coherent coexistence regulations on genetically modified (GM) and non-GM crops in all member states. While it stresses that any approach needs to be "proportionate to the aim of achieving coexistence", very few studies have actually attempted to assess whether the proposed spatial ex ante coexistence regulations (SEACERs) satisfy this proportionality condition. In this article, we propose a spatial framework based on an existing landscape and introduce the concept of shadow factor as a measure for the opportunity costs induced by SEACERs. Our empirical findings led us to advance the proposition that flexible SEACERs based on pollen barriers are more likely to respect the proportionality condition than rigid SEACERs based on isolation distances. Particularly in early adoption stages, imposing rigid SEACERs may substantially slow down GM crop adoption. Our findings argue for incorporating a certain degree of flexibility into SEACERs by advising pollen barrier agreements between farmers rather than imposing rigid isolation distances on GM farmers. The empirical questions of proportionality and flexibility have been largely ignored in the literature on coexistence and provide timely information for EU policy makers.
On the proportionality of EU spatial< i> ex ante coexistence regulations: Reply
Food Policy, 2010
Desquilbet and Bullock (2010) criticize some aspects of our analysis of the European Union's (EU) spatial ex ante coexistence regulations (SEACERs) of genetically modified (GM) and non-GM crops presented in Demont et al.(2009). We argue that, besides misinterpreting some of our original arguments, the authors propose a policy analysis framework which is inconsistent with the main goal of the EU's SEACERs. Their example incorrectly suggests that SEACERs play an additional role of regulating non-GM crop ...
On the proportionality of EU spatial< i> ex ante coexistence regulations
2009
The EU is currently struggling to implement coherent coexistence regulations on genetically modified (GM) and non-GM crops in all member states. While it stresses that any approach needs to be “proportionate to the aim of achieving coexistence”, very few studies have actually attempted to assess whether the proposed spatial ex ante coexistence regulations (SEACERs) satisfy this proportionality condition.
Pollen-mediated gene flow is one of the main concerns associated with the introduction of genetically modified (GM) crops. Should a premium for non-GM varieties emerge on the market, ‘contamination’ by GM pollen would generate a revenue loss for growers of non-GM varieties. This paper analyses the problem of pollen-mediated gene flow as a particular type of production externality. The model, although simple, provides useful insights into coexistence policies. Following on from this and taking GM herbicide-tolerant oilseed rape (Brassica napus) as a model crop, a Monte Carlo simulation is used to generate data and then estimate the effect of several important policy variables (including width of buffer zones and spatial aggregation) on the magnitude of the externality associated with pollen-mediated gene flow.
How can flexibility be integrated into coexistence regulations? A review
Journal of the science of food and agriculture, 2014
Member states in the European Union (EU) implemented both ex ante coexistence regulations and ex post liability schemes to ensure that genetically modified (GM) and non-GM crops can be cultivated side by side without excluding any agricultural option. Although proportionate coexistence is best achieved if regulated in a flexible manner, most implemented coexistence regulations merely rely on rigid measures. Flexible coexistence regulations, however, would reduce the regulatory burden on certain agricultural options and avoid jeopardizing economic incentives for coexistence. Flexibility can be integrated at: (i) the regulatory level by relaxing the rigidity of coexistence measures in ex ante regulations, yet without offsetting incentives to implement coexistence measures; (ii) the farm level by recommending the use of pollen barriers instead of large and fixed isolation distances; and (iii) the national/regional level by allowing diversified coexistence measures, which are adapted to the heterogeneity of farming in the EU. Owing to difficulties of implementation, the adoption of flexible and proportionate coexistence regulations will inevitably entail challenges.
Policies for the regulation of coexistence between GM and conventional crops
Pollen-mediated gene flow is one of the main concerns associated with the introduction of genetically modified (GM) crops, since growers of GM varieties normally do not take into account its possible impact on conventional and organic growers therefore generating negative externalities. Should a premium for non-GM varieties emerge on the market, 'contamination' with GM pollen would generate a revenue loss for growers of non-GM varieties. The existence of such externalities has led the European Union (EU) to put forward the concept of coexistence in order to guarantee farmers' freedom to plant both conventional and GM varieties without generating economic losses to conventional farmers. The first part of this paper develops a simple economic model analysing the problem of pollen-mediated gene flow as a particular kind of production externality. The model, although simple, provides useful insights into the policy needed to regulate coexistence. Since pollen-mediated gene flow is distancedependent, the externalities will depend on the spatial structure of GM adoption in the landscape. The second part of the paper, taking GM herbicide tolerant oilseed rape (Brassica napus) as a model crop, uses a Monte Carlo experiment to generate data and then estimate the effect of some important policy variables (i.e. number of GM and conventional fields in the landscape, width of buffer zones and spatial aggregation) on the magnitude of the externality associated with pollen-mediated gene flow. Our results show that buffer areas on conventional fields are more effective than those on GM fields and that the degree of spatial aggregation exerts the largest marginal effect on the externality to conventional growers. The implications of the results for the coexistence policies in the EU are then discussed.