© The Agricultural Economics Society and the European Association of Agricultural Economists
Edited By: Professor John Davis
Online ISSN: 1746-692X
Associated Title(s): Journal of Agricultural Economics
Recently Published Articles
- You have free access to this contentCMS Maize: A Tool to Reduce the Distance between GM and non-GM Maize (pages 31–35)
Heidrun Bückmann, Katja Thiele and Joachim Schiemann
Article first published online: 18 APR 2016 | DOI: 10.1111/1746-692X.12116
To limit admixture of genetically modified (GM) with non-GM crops in the early stages of production, codes of good agricultural practice for GM crops have been developed. In addition to general measures, crop-specific measures including the establishment of ‘isolation distances’ are required. The use of biological means like cytoplasmic male sterility (CMS) in maize provide more flexible isolation distances particularly in cases where GM maize requires higher levels of containment/confinement to ensure coexistence with agricultural production systems that do not cultivate GM plants.
- You have free access to this contentA Profile of non-GM Crop Growers in the United States (pages 64–68)
Nicholas Kalaitzandonakes and Alexandre Magnier
Article first published online: 18 APR 2016 | DOI: 10.1111/1746-692X.12122
In the US, the management of coexistence between GM and non-GM production systems has been left to market forces. Non-GM growers in the US assume the responsibility and costs of coexistence and, in turn, are compensated in the form of price premiums paid for non-GM crops. Using a producer survey we find that non-GM corn and soybean growers in the US are commercial farmers not much different in size, asset ownership and demographic characteristics to farmers that only grow GM crops.
- You have free access to this contentCorporate Strategy on GMOs under Alternative Futures: The Case of a Large Food Retailer in Italy (pages 52–58)
Francesca Passuello and Stefano Boccaletti
Article first published online: 18 APR 2016 | DOI: 10.1111/1746-692X.12120
This article analyses the possible response strategies of a large Italian food retailer to alternative future scenarios for the segregation of GM and non-GM products/ingredients in EU feed and food supply chains. Scenarios were developed by key EU feed-food supply chain stakeholders during a 2-day workshop held in Brussels in September 2014. Based on two major drivers, namely regulatory framework and perception of genetically modified organisms, stakeholders ended up with three scenarios: 1) Enabling regulatory framework, negative consumer's perception of GMOs; 2) Restrictive regulatory framework, positive consumer's perception of GMOs; 3) Restrictive regulatory framework, negative consumer's perception of GMOs.
- You have free access to this contentIssues in GM and Non-GM Coexistence: A United States Perspective (pages 69–73)
Article first published online: 18 APR 2016 | DOI: 10.1111/1746-692X.12123
The US food system is embedded as a supply chain within a diverse, ever-changing, and broad economic, biophysical, and socio-political context. A variety of actors with diverse goals are interested in increasing agricultural productivity, protecting the environment, improving food quality, and/or improving specific aspects of health, and their decisions shape the food system. US regulatory policy on GMOs is based on the principle of substantial equivalence – GMO and non-GMO foods contain comparable amounts of basic components – which is favourable to new technologies.
- You have free access to this contentLabelling GM-free Products. A Case Study of Dairy Companies in Germany (pages 45–51)
Maarten Punt, Thomas Venus and Justus Wesseler
Article first published online: 18 APR 2016 | DOI: 10.1111/1746-692X.12119
Food suppliers in the EU must comply with labelling regulations for genetically modified organisms (GMOs). However, excluded from mandatory labelling are food products derived from animals fed with GM feed (mainly GM soybean in the EU). Because of this labelling exemption, consumers are unable to identify which animal products were derived without the use of GMOs. Therefore, Germany and other countries introduced voluntary ‘GM-free’ labelling legislations or guidelines that allow companies to signal that their products are ‘GM-free’.