Trading off Use Restrictions and Benefit-Sharing for Genetic Materials for Food and Agriculture with an Emphasis on Upfront Payments
AbstractThis study investigates the tradeoffs that providers of genetic resources make between constructing a benefits arrangement and establishing use restrictions. The analysis makes use of project level data collected from university and government researchers in the US. Results show that when transfers require upfront payments recipients are not expected to contribute long-term monetary or non-monetary benefits, and nor are there restrictions on the transferred material. When providers seek information from project results they tend not to request upfront payments for providing genetic materials. Researchers tend to acquire genetic material at cost plus an additional fee when it comes from foreign counties and companies. The paper concludes by highlighting the roles that upfront payments and reduced restriction can play to improve exchange and utilization of genetic materials for public research.
Download InfoIf you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
Bibliographic InfoPaper provided by German Association of Agricultural Economists (GEWISOLA) in its series 53rd Annual Conference, Berlin, Germany, September 25-27, 2013 with number 156128.
Date of creation: 2013
Date of revision:
Upfront payment; benefit sharing; genetic resource; material exchange; use restriction; Agricultural and Food Policy;
This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
- Fearnside, Philip M., 2002. "Time preference in global warming calculations: a proposal for a unified index," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 41(1), pages 21-31, April.
- Shane Frederick & George Loewenstein & Ted O'Donoghue, 2002. "Time Discounting and Time Preference: A Critical Review," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 40(2), pages 351-401, June.
- John C. V. Pezzey, 1997. "Sustainability Constraints versus "Optimality" versus Intertemporal Concern, and Axioms versus Data," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 73(4), pages 448-466.
- Harris, Christopher & Laibson, David, 2001.
"Dynamic Choices of Hyperbolic Consumers,"
Econometric Society, vol. 69(4), pages 935-57, July.
- Christopher Harris & David Laibson, 1999. "Dynamic Choices of Hyperbolic Consumers," Harvard Institute of Economic Research Working Papers 1886, Harvard - Institute of Economic Research.
- Loewenstein, George & Prelec, Drazen, 1992. "Anomalies in Intertemporal Choice: Evidence and an Interpretation," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, MIT Press, vol. 107(2), pages 573-97, May.
- Marjorie K. Shelley, 1993. "Outcome Signs, Question Frames and Discount Rates," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 39(7), pages 806-815, July.
- Gurdial Nijar, 2011. "Food security and access and benefit sharing laws relating to genetic resources: promoting synergies in national and international governance," International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 11(2), pages 99-116, May.
- Holden, Stein T. & Shiferaw, Bekele & Wik, Mette, 1998. "Poverty, market imperfections and time preferences: of relevance for environmental policy?," Environment and Development Economics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 3(01), pages 105-130, February.
- Welch, Eric W. & Shin, Eunjung & Long, Jennifer, 2013. "Potential effects of the Nagoya Protocol on the exchange of non-plant genetic resources for scientific research: Actors, paths, and consequences," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 86(C), pages 136-147.
- Landry, Rejean & Amara, Nabil, 1998. "The impact of transaction costs on the institutional structuration of collaborative academic research," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 27(9), pages 901-913, December.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (AgEcon Search).
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.