Are EU spatial ex ante coexistence regulations proportional?

dc.creatorDemont, Matty
dc.creatorDaems, W.
dc.creatorDillen, Koen
dc.creatorMathijs, Erik
dc.creatorSausse, C.
dc.creatorTollens, Eric
dc.date2017-04-01T13:52:57Z
dc.date.accessioned2026-07-09T04:35:27Z
dc.descriptionThe 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 define proportionality as a functional relationship which is weakly increasing in the incentives for coexistence. We propose a spatial framework based on an existing landscape and introduce the new concept of shadow factor as a measure for the opportunity costs induced by SEACERs. This enables comparing the proportionality of (i) rigid SEACERs which are based on large isolation distances imposed on GM farmers versus (ii) flexible SEACERs based on pollen barrier agreements between neighboring farmers. Our theoretical and empirical findings argue for flexibility as rigid SEACERs violate the proportionality condition and, hence, are not consistent with the objectives of the EU.
dc.identifierdoi:10.22004/ag.econ.44191
dc.identifierhttps://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/44191/files/557.pdf
dc.identifierhttp://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/44191
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/123456789/552119
dc.languageeng
dc.publisher
dc.sourcehttp://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/44191
dc.titleAre EU spatial ex ante coexistence regulations proportional?
dc.typeText

Archivos