IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ags/aare03/57909.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Access Issues for Plant Breeders in an Increasingly Privatized World

Author

Listed:
  • Lindner, Robert K.

Abstract

There is a growing trend to widespread privatisation of crop breeding, and there are grounds for expecting this trend to continue and even to accelerate. Possible consequences for Australian grain growers and the national interest of much greater private sector involvement in plant breeding are explored. Growing privatisation and commercialisation of plant breeding will lead to increased competition between plant breeders. While this increased competition has been at least partly driven by the potential for value creation, it also is likely to enhance value creation from plant breeding so long as there is adequate continuing investment in the capacity for plant breeding, and more particularly in productivity enhancing enabling technology. In the event of monopoly provision of such enabling technology, an important policy issue will be access to what might be termed essential plant breeding infrastructure. For any access regime to essential infrastructure, the core issue is to select terms and conditions for access that promote full and efficient competition in upstream and downstream markets (e.g. plant breeding) while preserving the incentive for adequate levels of investment in the ongoing development, maintenance, and provision of such essential infrastructure. A key, perhaps pivotal issue will be pricing policy and practice. Because EPBI has the public good characteristic of being non-rival in use, price discovery by market processes can not be expected to produce the desired outcome. Moreover, even if an access regime mandated that EPBI be made available to all plant breeders at a uniform price, the imbalance in market power between the monopoly provider of EPBI and plant breeders seeking access would almost inevitably result in both under-production of EPBI, and in under-utilisation of any produced EPBI due to price rationing. Such outcomes would severely undermine the competitive position of Australian grain growers in international markets. Results from the literature on what are called excludable public goods are used to analyse the impact on the incentive for adequate investment in EPBI under an access regime mandating uniform pricing.

Suggested Citation

  • Lindner, Robert K., 2003. "Access Issues for Plant Breeders in an Increasingly Privatized World," 2003 Conference (47th), February 12-14, 2003, Fremantle, Australia 57909, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society.
  • Handle: RePEc:ags:aare03:57909
    DOI: 10.22004/ag.econ.57909
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/57909/files/2003_lindner.pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.22004/ag.econ.57909?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Geoffrey Brennan & Cliff Walsh, 1985. "Private Markets in (Excludable) Public Goods: A Reexamination," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 100(3), pages 811-819.
    2. Thirtle, Colin G. & Srinivasan, Chittur S. & Heisey, Paul W., 2001. "Public Sector Plant Breeding In A Privatizing World," Agricultural Information Bulletins 33775, United States Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service.
    3. Unknown, 1999. "Impact of Competition Policy Reforms on Rural and Regional Australia," Inquiry Reports 31892, Productivity Commission.
    4. Burns, Michael E & Walsh, Cliff, 1981. "Market Provision of Price-excludable Public Goods: A General Analysis," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 89(1), pages 166-191, February.
    5. Brennan, Geoffrey & Walsh, Cliff, 1981. "A Monopoly Model of Public Goods Provision: The Uniform Pricing Case," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 71(1), pages 196-206, March.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Lindner, Robert K., 2004. "Privatised provision of essential plant breeding infrastructure," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 48(2), pages 1-21.
    2. Bob Lindner, 2004. "Privatised provision of essential plant breeding infrastructure," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 48(2), pages 301-321, June.
    3. Lindner, Robert K., 2004. "Economic Issues for Plant Breeding - Public Funding and Private Ownership," Australasian Agribusiness Review, University of Melbourne, Department of Agriculture and Food Systems, vol. 12.
    4. Fraser, Clive D., 1996. "On the provision of excludable public goods," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 60(1), pages 111-130, April.
    5. Lindner, Robert K., 1993. "Privatising The Production Of Knowledge: Promise And Pitfalls For Agricultural Research And Extension," Australian Journal of Agricultural Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 37(3), pages 1-21, December.
    6. Ingrid Ott & Stephen J. Turnovsky, 2006. "Excludable and Non‐excludable Public Inputs: Consequences for Economic Growth," Economica, London School of Economics and Political Science, vol. 73(292), pages 725-748, November.
    7. Hines Jr., James R., 2000. "What is benefit taxation?," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 75(3), pages 483-492, March.
    8. Fraser, Clive D., 2000. "When Is Efficiency Separable from Distribution in the Provision of Club Goods?," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 90(2), pages 204-221, February.
    9. Geoffrey Brennan & Dwight Lee & Cliff Walsh, 1983. "Monopoly Markets in Public Goods: the Case of the Uniform All-or-None Price," Public Finance Review, , vol. 11(4), pages 465-490, October.
    10. Heywood, John S. & Li, Dongyang & Ye, Guangliang, 2023. "Private provision of price excludable public goods by rivals," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 214(C), pages 291-307.
    11. Kamath Shyam J., 1994. "Privatization: A Market Prospect Perspective," Journal des Economistes et des Etudes Humaines, De Gruyter, vol. 5(1), pages 1-52, March.
    12. Noriaki Matsushima & Ryusuke Shinohara, 2015. "The efficiency of monopolistic provision of public goods through simultaneous bilateral bargaining," ISER Discussion Paper 0948, Institute of Social and Economic Research, Osaka University.
    13. Hummel Jeffrey Rogers & Lavoie Don, 1994. "National Defense And The Public-Goods Problem," Journal des Economistes et des Etudes Humaines, De Gruyter, vol. 5(2-3), pages 1-26, June.
    14. Matthew S. Clancy & GianCarlo Moschini, 2017. "Intellectual Property Rights and the Ascent of Proprietary Innovation in Agriculture," Annual Review of Resource Economics, Annual Reviews, vol. 9(1), pages 53-74, October.
    15. George Verikios & Xiao-guang Zhang, 2010. "Structural Change in the Australian Electricity Industry During the 1990s and the Effect on Household Income Distribution," Centre of Policy Studies/IMPACT Centre Working Papers g-207, Victoria University, Centre of Policy Studies/IMPACT Centre.
    16. Madden, John Robert & Giesecke, James, 2002. "Competition reforms and collaborative federalism: a dynamic multiregional applied general equilibrium analysis," ERSA conference papers ersa02p343, European Regional Science Association.
    17. Verikios, George & Zhang, Xiao-guang, 2013. "Structural change in the Australian electricity industry during the 1990s and the effect on household income distribution: A macro–micro approach," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 32(C), pages 564-575.
    18. Bill Pritchard & Neil Argent & Scott Baum & Lisa Bourke & John Martin & Phil Mcmanus & Anthony Sorensen & Jim Walmsley, 2012. "Local -- If Possible: How the Spatial Networking of Economic Relations amongst Farm Enterprises Aids Small Town Survival in Rural Australia," Regional Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 46(4), pages 539-557, June.
    19. Pauline M McGuirk, 2004. "State, Strategy, and Scale in the Competitive City: A Neo-Gramscian Analysis of the Governance of ‘Global Sydney’," Environment and Planning A, , vol. 36(6), pages 1019-1043, June.
    20. Griffith, G.R., 2000. "Competition in the Food Marketing Chain," 2000 Conference (44th), January 23-25, 2000, Sydney, Australia 171911, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ags:aare03:57909. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: AgEcon Search (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/aaresea.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.