On the proportionality of EU spatial ex ante coexistence regulations: Reply
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,...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Food policy 2010-04, Vol.35 (2), p.183-184 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , , , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
Zusammenfassung: | 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 supply on the market. This would be inefficient from a policy economics perspective, especially in an open economy where global trade is taken into account. Therefore, we argue that analyzing flexibility of SEACERs in a market framework could lead to erroneous conclusions and in that case a simple farm level analysis such as presented in
Demont et al. (2009) is preferred. |
---|---|
ISSN: | 0306-9192 1873-5657 |
DOI: | 10.1016/j.foodpol.2010.03.001 |