IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ags/eaae98/10097.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

The market acceptance and welfare impacts of genetic use restriction technologies (GURTS)

Author

Listed:
  • Khachaturyan, Marianna
  • Yiannaka, Amalia

Abstract

The paper develops a theoretical framework of heterogeneous consumers and producers to examine the market and welfare effects of the introduction of variety-level genetic use restriction technologies (V-GURTs) under the current No-Labeling regime of GMPs in the US market. Specifically, the study examines how the agronomic characteristics of GURTs, consumer perceptions and preferences regarding interventions in the production process (i.e., genetic modification) and producer cost structures (e.g., dependency on saving seed) affect the adoption of the technology by producers, the market acceptance of GURTs by consumers and consequently the innovator's incentive to introduce the new technology. Analytical results show that the introduction of GURTs may be welfare enhancing for consumers, producers and innovating firms when consumer aversion to GURTs is low, the agronomic benefits of the GURTs crop are high, and the expected penalty producers face when they cheat on their GM licensing agreements (e.g., due to inefficient or costly monitoring) is low.

Suggested Citation

  • Khachaturyan, Marianna & Yiannaka, Amalia, 2006. "The market acceptance and welfare impacts of genetic use restriction technologies (GURTS)," 98th Seminar, June 29-July 2, 2006, Chania, Crete, Greece 10097, European Association of Agricultural Economists.
  • Handle: RePEc:ags:eaae98:10097
    DOI: 10.22004/ag.econ.10097
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/10097/files/sp06kh01.pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.22004/ag.econ.10097?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
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Giannakas, Konstantinos & Fulton, Murray, 2002. "Consumption effects of genetic modification: what if consumers are right?," Agricultural Economics, Blackwell, vol. 27(2), pages 97-109, August.
    2. Ambec, Stefan & Langinier, Corinne & Lemarie, Stephane, 2008. "AJAE Appendix: Incentives to Reduce Crop Trait Durability," American Journal of Agricultural Economics APPENDICES, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 90(2), pages 1-11.
    3. Murray Fulton & Konstantinos Giannakas, 2004. "Inserting GM Products into the Food Chain: The Market and Welfare Effects of Different Labeling and Regulatory Regimes," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 86(1), pages 42-60.
    4. Konstantinos Giannakas, 2002. "Information Asymmetries and Consumption Decisions in Organic Food Product Markets," Canadian Journal of Agricultural Economics/Revue canadienne d'agroeconomie, Canadian Agricultural Economics Society/Societe canadienne d'agroeconomie, vol. 50(1), pages 35-50, March.
    5. Srinivasan, C.S. & Thirtle, Colin, 2003. "Potential economic impacts of terminator technologies: policy implications for developing countries," Environment and Development Economics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 8(1), pages 187-205, February.
    6. Lence, Sergio H. & Hayes, Dermot J. & McCunn, Alan & Smith, Stephen & Niebur, William S., 2005. "Welfare Impacts of Intellectual Property Protection in the Seed Industry," Staff General Research Papers Archive 12434, Iowa State University, Department of Economics.
    7. Lence, Sergio H. & Hayes, Dermot J., 2005. "Technology Fees Versus Gurts in the Presence of Spillovers: World Welfare Impacts," Staff General Research Papers Archive 12417, Iowa State University, Department of Economics.
    8. Konstantinos Giannakas & Amalia Yiannaka, 2008. "Market and Welfare Effects of Second-Generation, Consumer-Oriented GM Products," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 90(1), pages 152-171.
    9. Goeschl, Timo & Swanson, Timothy, 2003. "The development impact of genetic use restriction technologies: a forecast based on the hybrid crop experience," Environment and Development Economics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 8(1), pages 149-165, February.
    10. Alan McCunn & Stephen Smith & William S. Niebur, 2005. "Welfare Impacts of Intellectual Property Protection in the Seed Industry," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 87(4), pages 951-968.
    11. Stefan Ambec & Corinne Langinier & Stéphane Lemarié, 2008. "Incentives to Reduce Crop Trait Durability," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 90(2), pages 379-391.
    12. Diana M. Burton & H. Alan Love & Gokhan Ozertan & Curtis R. Taylor, 2005. "Property Rights Protection of Biotechnology Innovations," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 14(4), pages 779-812, December.
    13. Timo Goeschl & Timothy Swanson, 2000. "Genetic use restriction technologies and the diffusion of yield gains to developing countries," Journal of International Development, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 12(8), pages 1159-1178.
    14. C. S. Srinivasan & Colin Thirtle, 2000. "Understanding the emergence of terminator technologies," Journal of International Development, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 12(8), pages 1147-1158.
    15. Timothy M. Swanson (ed.), 2002. "Biotechnology, Agriculture and the Developing World," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 2399.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Hervouet, Adrien & Langinier, Corinne, 2018. "Plant Breeders’ Rights, Patents, and Incentives to Innovate," Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Western Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 43(1), January.

    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. Derek Eaton, 2013. "Innovation and IPRs in the Agricultural Seed Sector," CIES Research Paper series 19-2013, Centre for International Environmental Studies, The Graduate Institute.
    2. Eaton, Derek, 2015. "Innovation and IPRs for Agricultural Crop Varieties as Intermediate Goods," 2015 Conference, August 9-14, 2015, Milan, Italy 211581, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    3. Eaton, Derek, 2014. "A model of IPRs in the international supply chain of seeds and agricultural production," 2014 International Congress, August 26-29, 2014, Ljubljana, Slovenia 182643, European Association of Agricultural Economists.
    4. Adrien Hervouet & Stéphane Lemarié, 2023. "The Economics of Royalty Rates in Plant Breeding," Working Papers 2023-03, Grenoble Applied Economics Laboratory (GAEL).
    5. Baudry Marc & Hervouet Adrien, 2016. "Innovation in the Seed Market: The Role of IPRs and Commercialization Rules," Journal of Agricultural & Food Industrial Organization, De Gruyter, vol. 14(1), pages 51-68, May.
    6. Adrien Hervouet & Marc Baudry, 2011. "Promoting innovation in the seed market and biodiversity: the role of IPRs and commercialization rules," Post-Print hal-02012239, HAL.
    7. Stefan Ambec & Corinne Langinier & Stéphane Lemarié, 2008. "Incentives to Reduce Crop Trait Durability," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 90(2), pages 379-391.
    8. Wilson, William W. & Huso, Scott R., 2008. "Trait Stacking, Licensing, and Seed Firm Acquisitions on Genetically Modified Grains: A Strategic Analysis," Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Western Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 33(3), pages 1-20.
    9. Hajderllari, Eliona & Karantininis, Kostas, 2011. "Genetically modified foods in vertically differentiated and vertically oligopolistic markets," 2011 International Congress, August 30-September 2, 2011, Zurich, Switzerland 114774, European Association of Agricultural Economists.
    10. Awada, Lana & Yiannaka, Amalia, 2012. "Consumer perceptions and the effects of country of origin labeling on purchasing decisions and welfare," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(1), pages 21-30.
    11. Rim Lassoued & Konstantinos Giannakas, 2010. "Economic Effects of the Consumer‐oriented Genetically Modified Products in Markets with a Labelling Regime," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 61(3), pages 499-526, September.
    12. Olivier Bonroy & Christos Constantatos, 2015. "On the Economics of Labels: How Their Introduction Affects the Functioning of Markets and the Welfare of All Participants," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 97(1), pages 239-259.
    13. Zhao, Li & Gu, Haiying & Yue, Chengyan & Ahlstrom, David, 2013. "Consumer welfare and GM food labeling: A simulation using an adjusted Kumaraswamy distribution," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 42(C), pages 58-70.
    14. Bchir, Mohamed Hedi & Bouet, Antoine, 2009. "Which tariff aggregator for trade modelers?," Conference papers 331888, Purdue University, Center for Global Trade Analysis, Global Trade Analysis Project.
    15. Konduru, Srinivasa & Kalaitzandonakes, Nicholas G. & Magnier, Alexandre, 2009. "GMO Testing Strategies and Implications for Trade: A Game Theoretic Approach," 2009 Annual Meeting, July 26-28, 2009, Milwaukee, Wisconsin 49594, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    16. Kontoleon Andreas & Yabe Mitsuyasu, 2006. "Market Segmentation Analysis of Preferences for GM Derived Animal Foods in the UK," Journal of Agricultural & Food Industrial Organization, De Gruyter, vol. 4(1), pages 1-38, December.
    17. Koji Domon & Alessandro Melcarne & Giovanni B. Ramello, 2022. "Fake & original: the case of Japanese food in Southeast Asian countries," European Journal of Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 54(2), pages 327-347, October.
    18. Giannakas Konstantinos & Kalaitzandonakes Nicholas & Magnier Alexander & Mattas Konstadinos, 2011. "Economic Effects of Purity Standards in Biotech Labeling Laws," Journal of Agricultural & Food Industrial Organization, De Gruyter, vol. 9(1), pages 1-47, April.
    19. Sadashivappa, Prakash & Qaim, Matin, 2009. "Effects of Bt Cotton in India During the First Five Years of Adoption," 2009 Conference, August 16-22, 2009, Beijing, China 49947, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    20. Kvakkestad, Valborg, 2009. "Institutions and the R&D of GM-crops," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 68(10), pages 2688-2695, August.

    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:eaae98:10097. 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/eaaeeea.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.