Labeling Regulations and Segregation of First- and, Second-Generation Genetically Modified Products: Innovation Incentives and Welfare Effects, April 2005

We review some of the most significant issues and results on the economic effects of genetically modified (GM) product innovation, with emphasis on the question of GM labeling and the need for costly segregation and identity preservation activities. The analysis is organized around an explicit model that can accommodate the features of both first-generation and second-generation GM products. The model accounts for the proprietary nature of GM innovations and for the critical role of consumer preferences vis-à-vis GM products, as well as for the impacts of segregation and identity preservation and the effects of a mandatory GM labeling regulation. We also investigate briefly a novel question in this setting, the choice of “research direction”when both cost-reducing and quality-enhancing GM innovations are feasible.

Do fire and seed additions alter strong seed timing and priority effects on prairie establishment?, 2011

Many prairie restoration projects are hampered by a lack of knowledge on how to restore the high diversity found in prairies, while at the same time preventing the establishment of a large weedy component. Methods are needed to increase diversity and abundance of native species while minimizing exotic species invasions in both 1) newly planted restorations and 2) established restorations. We established an experiment in Story and Monona counties in 2005 to determine the effects of different native cover crop species and timing of seeding on the establishment of new prairie restorations. We found that adding a 30-species prairie mix in early spring led to diverse native communities, but adding the mix in the late summer or the following year after cover crops established led to low diversity communities dominated by exotics. The identity of cover crops affected communities less than timing of seed additions. A second seed addition added to ash after a spring fire in the seventh year (Monona County site) increased recruitment from the prairie mix slightly, but the increase was not enough to cause convergence in the treatments. Surprisingly, the second seed addition increased diversity only in communities that were already the most diverse (i.e., in plots seeded with the prairie mix in early spring before cover crops established). These results imply that 1) cover crops are not effective for establishing prairie and 2) over seeding into established plots may not be an easy and efficient way to increase native recruitment and lower weedy species abundances. Therefore, focusing on establishing high levels of recruitment and diversity and excluding weedy species during the critical time early in establishment should be a priority for new projects.