References

This folder holds the following references to publications, sorted by year and author.

There are 48 references in this bibliography folder.

Desquilbert, M and Bullock, D (2010).
On the Proportionality of EU Spatial Ex Ante Coexistence Regulations: A Comment
Food Policy, forthcoming.

Shleifer, A (2010).
Efficient Regulation
Cambridge, MA: National Bureau of Economic Research, NBER Working Paper(No. 15651).

Demont, M, Dillen, K, Daems, W, Sausse, C, Tollens, E, and Mathijs, E (2009).
On the Proportionality of EU Spatial Ex Ante Coexistence Regulations
Food Policy, 34(6):508-518.

Wesseler, J (2009).
The Santaniello Theorem of Irreversible Benefits
AgBioForum, 12(1):8-13.

Breustedt, G, Müller-Scheeßel, J, and Latacz-Lohmann, U (2008).
Forecasting the Adoption of GM Oilseed Rape: Evidence from a Discrete Choice Experiment in Germany
Journal of Agricultural Economics, 59(2):237-256.

Koch, B (2008).
Economic Loss Caused by Genetically Modified Organism
Springer Verlag: Wien.

Beckmann, V and Wesseler, J (2007).
Spatial Dimension of Externalities and the Coase Theorem: Implications for Co-Existence of Transgenic Crops
In: Regional Externalities, ed. by W. Heijman, Dordrecht: Springer.

Wesseler, J, Scatasta, S, and Nillesen, E (2007).
The Maximum Incremental Social Tolerable Irreversible Costs (MISTICs) and other Benefits and Costs of Introducing Transgenic Maize in the EU-15
Pedobiologia, 51(3):261-269.

Beckmann, V, Soregaroli, C, and Wesseler, J (2006).
Co-Existence Rules and Regulations in the European Union
American Journal of Agricultural Economics, 88:1193-1199.

Bundesamt für Verbraucherschutz (2006).
Standortregister
Berlin.

Calcott, P and Hutton, S (2006).
The Choice of a Liability Regime When There is a Regulatory Gatekeeper
Journal of Environmental Management and Economics, 51:153-164.

Commission of the European Communities (2006).
Annex to the Communication from the Commission Council and the European Parliament. Report on the Implementation of National Measures on the Coexistence of Genetically Modified Crops with Conventional and Organic Farming. COM (2006) 104.
Brussels.

Falck Zepeda, J (2006).
Coexistence, Genetically Modified Biotechnologies and Biosafety: Implications for Developing Countries
American Journal of Agricultural Economics, 88:1200-1208.

GFR (Gentechnikfreie Regionen) (2006).
Übersicht: Gentechnikfreie Regionen in Deutschland (Stand: 08.12.2006).
Luneburg.

Scatasta, S, Wesseler, J, and Demont, M (2006).
Irreversibility, Uncertainty, and the Adoption of Transgenic Crops: Experiences from Applications to HT sugar beet, HT corn, and Bt Corn
In: Economics of Regulation of Agricultural Biotechnology, ed. by J. Alston, R. Just, and D. Zilberman, Berlin: Springer.

Smyth, S and Kershen, D (2006).
Agricultural Biotechnology: Legal Liability Regimes from Comparative and International Perspectives
Global Jurist Advances, 6:Article 3.

Statistische Berichte (2006).
Größenstruktur der Landwirtschaftlichen Betriebe im Land Brandenburg 2005.
Potsdam: Landesbetrieb für Datenverarbeitung und Statistik.

Statistische Berichte (2006).
Bodennutzung der landwirtschaftlichen Betriebe im Land Brandenburg 2005.
Potsdam: Landesbetrieb für Datenverarbeitung und Statistik.

Statistische Berichte (2006).
Betrieb mit ökologischem Landbau im Land Brandenburg 2005
Potsdam: Landesbetrieb für Datenverarbeitung und Statistik.

Beckmann, V (2005).
Comment on Soregaroli and Wesseler: Minimum Distance rRquirements and Liability: Implications for Co-Existence
In: Environmental Costs and Benefits of Transgenic Crops, ed. by J. Wesseler, Dordrecht: Springer.

Bundesrat (2005).
Gesetz zur Neuordnung des Gentechnikrechts. Bundesgesetzblatt 2005: Teil I Nr. 8
Berlin.

Commission of the European Communities (2005).
Questions and Answers on the Regulation of GMOs in the European Union. Available at: http://europa.eu.int/comm/food/food/biotechnology/gmfood/qanda_en.htm. Update: 24-10-2005
Brussels.

Landtag Brandenburg (2005).
Antwort der Landesregierung auf die kleine Anfrage Nr. 884: Maiszünsler und der Anbau gentechnisch veränderten Mais. Drucksache 4/2309
Potsdam.

Soregaroli, C and Wesseler, J (2005).
Minimum Distance Requirements and Liability: Implications for Co-Existence
In: Environmental Costs and Benefits of Transgenic Crops, ed. by J. Wesseler, Springer, Dordrecht.

Boyer, M and Porrini, D (2004).
Modelling the Choice between Regulations and Liability in Terms of Social Welfare
Canadian Journal of Economics, 37:590-612.