Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-dsjbd Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-20T13:30:53.571Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

GM-free private standards, public regulation of GM products and mass media

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  24 January 2014

Mauro Vigani  and
Alessandro Olper
Mauro Vigani
Affiliation:
European Commission, Joint Research Centre (JRC), Institute for Prospective Technological Studies (IPTS), Edificio Expo, C/ Inca Garcilaso 3, 41092 Seville, Spain. Tel. +34 95 448 7175. E-mail: [email protected]
Alessandro Olper
Affiliation:
Università degli Studi di Milano, Department of Economics, Management and Quantitative Methods, and LICOS – Centre for Institution and Economic Performance, Catholic University of Leuven, Belgium. E-mail: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

This paper analyses the factors inducing retailers to adopt genetically modified (GM)-free private standards, using information on 44 retailers operating in 54 countries. Retailers are distinguished between those not using GM ingredients and those using ingredients which are potentially GM in their private label products. Results from a binary response model show that many of the drivers highlighted in the empirical literature, such as historical factors, communication infrastructure and sectorial conditions, affect the likelihood of adopting GM-free private standards. Moreover, we test additional hypotheses from the political economy of standards formation and of mass media. Key results show that a higher share of government-oriented public media reduces the probability of adopting GM-free private standards, while different genetically modified organism public standards between home and operating countries increase this probability.

Type
Research Article
Information
Environment and Development Economics , Volume 19 , Issue 6 , December 2014 , pp. 743 - 768
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2014 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Codron, J.M., Giraud-Héraud, E., and Soler, L.G. (2005), ‘Minimum quality standards, premium private labels, and European meat and fresh produce retailing’, Food Policy 30: 270–283.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Correa, P.G., Fernandes, A.M., and Uregian, C.J. (2008), ‘Technology adoption and the investment climate: firm-level evidence for Eastern Europe and Central Asia’, World Bank Policy Research Working Paper No. 4707, World Bank, Washington, DC.Google Scholar
Curtis, K.R., McCluskey, J.J., and Swinnen, J.F.M. (2008), ‘Differences in global risk perceptions of biotechnology and the political economy of the media’, International Journal of Global Environmental Issues 8(1/2): 77–89.Google Scholar
Deloitte (2009), Emerging from the Downturn – Global Powers of Retailing 2010, London: Deloitte Touche Tohmatsu.Google Scholar
Djankov, S., McLiesh, C., Nenova, T., and Shleifer, A. (2003), ‘Who owns the media?’, Journal of Law and Economics 46: 341–381.Google Scholar
EC (2009), ‘The evolution of value-added repartition along the European food supply chain’, Commission Staff Working Document, SEC(2009) 1445, 28 October, European Commission, Brussels.Google Scholar
García Martinez, M. and Poole, N. (2004), ‘The development of private fresh produce safety standards: implications for developing Mediterranean exporting countries’, Food Policy 29: 229–255.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gruère, G.P. (2006), ‘A preliminary comparison of the retail level effects of genetically modified food labelling policies in Canada and France’, Food Policy 31: 148–161.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gruère, G. and Sengupta, D. (2009), ‘GM-free private standards and their effects on biosafety decision-making’, Food Policy 34: 399–406.Google Scholar
Gruère, G.P., Carter, C.A., and Farzin, Y.H. (2009), ‘Explaining international differences in genetically modified food labeling regulations’, Review of International Economics 17(3): 393–408.Google Scholar
Head, K., Mayer, T., and Ries, J. (2010), ‘The erosion of colonial trade linkages after independence’, Journal of International Economics 81(1): 1–14.Google Scholar
Herzfeld, T., Drescher, L.S., and Grebitus, C. (2011), ‘Cross-national adoption of private food quality standards’, Food Policy 36: 401–411.Google Scholar
Kalaitzandonakes, N., Marks, L.A., and Vickner, S.S. (2004), ‘Media coverage of biotech foods and influence on consumer choice’, American Journal of Agricultural Economics 86(5): 1238–1246.Google Scholar
Kaufmann, D., Kraay, A., and Mastruzzi, M. (2007), ‘Governance matters VI: governance indicators for 1996–2006’, World Bank Policy Research Working Paper No. 4280, World Bank, Washington, DC.Google Scholar
Lutz, S., Lyon, T.P., and Maxwell, J.W. (2000), ‘Quality leadership when regulatory standards are forthcoming’, Journal of Industrial Economics 48: 331–348.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Maertens, M., Colen, L., and Swinnen, J.F.M. (2011), ‘Globalisation and poverty in Senegal: a worst case scenario?’, European Review of Agricultural Economics 38(1): 31–54.Google Scholar
Mainville, D.Y., Zylbersztajn, D., Farina, E.M.M.Q., and Reardon, T. (2005), ‘Determinants of retailers' decisions to use public or private grades and standards: evidence from the fresh produce market of São Paulo, Brazil’, Food Policy 30: 334–353.Google Scholar
Maxwell, J.W., Lyon, T.P., and Hackett, S.C. (2000), ‘Self-regulation and social welfare: the political economy of corporate environmentalism’, Journal of Law and Economics 43: 583–617.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McCluskey, J.J. and Swinnen, J.F.M. (2004), ‘Political economy of the media and consumer perceptions of biotechnology’, American Journal of Agricultural Economics 86(5): 1230–1237.Google Scholar
McCluskey, J.J. and Winfree, J.A. (2009), ‘Pre-empting public regulation with private food quality standards’, European Review of Agricultural Economics 36(4): 525–539.Google Scholar
Neumayer, E. and Perkins, R. (2005), ‘Uneven geographies of organizational practice: explaining the cross-national transfer and adoption of ISO9000’, Economic Geography 81(3): 237–260.Google Scholar
Spence, M. (1976), ‘Product differentiation and welfare’, American Economic Review 66(2): 407–414.Google Scholar
Takeshima, H. and Gruère, G.P. (2011), ‘Pressure group competition and GMO regulations in sub-Saharan Africa – insights from the Becker Model’, Journal of Agricultural & Food Industrial Organization 9, Art. 7.Google Scholar
Tillie, P., Vigani, M., Dillen, K., and Rodríguez Cerezo, E. (2012), ‘Proceedings of a workshop on market for non-genetically modified identity preserved crops and derived products’, JRC Scientific and Policy Report No. 76117, European Commission, Luxemburg.Google Scholar
Vandemoortele, T. and Deconinck, K. (2013), ‘When are private standards more stringent than public standards?’, American Journal of Agricultural Economics; doi:10.1093/ajae/aat064.Google Scholar
Vigani, M. and Olper, A. (2013), ‘GMO standards, endogenous policy and the market for information’, Food Policy 43: 32–43.Google Scholar
Vigani, M., Raimondi, V. and Olper, A. (2012), ‘International trade and endogenous standards: the case of GMO regulations’, World Trade Review 11(3): 415–437.Google Scholar
von Schlippenbach, V. and Teichmann, I. (2012), ‘The strategic use of private quality standards in food supply chains’, American Journal of Agricultural Economics 94(5): 1189–1201.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wesseler, J., Scatasta, S., and El Hadji, F. (2011), ‘Environmental benefits and costs of GM crops’, in Carter, C., Moschini, G.C. and Sheldon, I. (eds), Genetically Modified Food and Global Welfare, Volume 10, Frontiers of Economics and Globalization series, Bingley: Emerald Group Publishing, pp. 173–199.Google Scholar