Skip to main content
    • Aa
    • Aa
  • Get access
    Check if you have access via personal or institutional login
  • Cited by 8
  • Cited by
    This article has been cited by the following publications. This list is generated based on data provided by CrossRef.

    Oosterhuis, Frans Papyrakis, Elissaios and Boteler, Benjamin 2014. Economic instruments and marine litter control. Ocean & Coastal Management, Vol. 102, p. 47.

    Alderete-C, A. Guerra-San, J.J. Cruz-Lande, N. De la Brito, R. Guevara, E. Gelabert, R. Nunez, E. Endanu, E. and Amador-del, L.E. 2011. Evaluation of Clitoria ternatea L. in Relation with Fertility in Tropical Soils. Journal of Applied Sciences, Vol. 11, Issue. 6, p. 1044.

    Babbar, Shashi B. Kaur, Amandeep and Walia, Neetika 2008. Compendium of Transgenic Crop Plants.

    Aslaksen, Iulie and Ingeborg Myhr, Anne 2007. “The worth of a wildflower”: Precautionary perspectives on the environmental risk of GMOs. Ecological Economics, Vol. 60, Issue. 3, p. 489.

    Kondoh, Kazumi and Jussaume, Raymond A. 2006. Contextualizing farmers’ attitudes towards genetically modified crops. Agriculture and Human Values, Vol. 23, Issue. 3, p. 341.

    Belcher, Ken Nolan, James and Phillips, Peter W.B. 2005. Genetically modified crops and agricultural landscapes: spatial patterns of contamination. Ecological Economics, Vol. 53, Issue. 3, p. 387.

    Batie, Sandra S. 2003. The Environmental Impacts of Genetically Modified Plants: Challenges to Decision Making. American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Vol. 85, Issue. 5, p. 1107.

    Ervin, David E Welsh, Rick Batie, Sandra S and Carpentier, Chantal Line 2003. Towards an ecological systems approach in public research for environmental regulation of transgenic crops. Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment, Vol. 99, Issue. 1-3, p. 1.

  • Environment and Development Economics, Volume 6, Issue 4
  • October 2001, pp. 435-457

Transgenic crops and the environment: missing markets and public roles

  • Sandra S. Batie (a1) and David E. Ervin (a2)
  • DOI:
  • Published online: 01 October 2001

The rapidity of change has left scant opportunity for investigation of the consequences of adoption of transgenic crops on long-term ecosystem or economic system functioning. Economic theory suggests that, if the “Biotechnology Revolution” is left to market forces alone, there will be neglected public goods. Theory and limited empirical evidence suggests that there are significant incentives for private firms to discount and neglect certain environmental impacts and to develop products that meet mainly the needs of those able and willing to pay. Negative distributional impacts on rural societies and economies will not normally enter the private calculus nor will the long-term problems of insect and plant resistance. Thus, there is a strong case for enhanced public roles with respect to the use of transgenic crops. The adoption of the precautionary approach in public policies addressing transgenic crops is one alternative to better reflect public concerns.

Hide All
An earlier version of this paper was presented at a Conference on Agro-industrialization, Globalization and Economic Development, 6–7 August, 1999, American Agricultural Economics Association Meetings, Nashville, Tennessee.
Recommend this journal

Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this journal to your organisation's collection.

Environment and Development Economics
  • ISSN: 1355-770X
  • EISSN: 1469-4395
  • URL: /core/journals/environment-and-development-economics
Please enter your name
Please enter a valid email address
Who would you like to send this to? *