IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/gii/ciesrp/cies_rp_10.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Intellectual Property and Biodiversity: When and Where are Property Rights important?

Author

Abstract

An important issue in the life sciences industries concerns the nature of the incentive mechanism that should govern the production of innovation within this R&D sector. We look at the specific problem of coordinating the supply of inputs across very different agents - North and South - that must each supply inputs in order to generate innovations from the industry. The current arrangement in this industry provides for a single property right at 'end of the pipeline', i.e. where marketing of the innovation occurs. This property rights scenario raises two problems, one of efficiency and one of equity. The key question asked here pertains to the number and placement of property rights that should be instituted to address this property rights failure. Should one establish new property rights in traditional knowledge alone; property rights in genetic information alone; or in both? We demonstrate that in a world in which traditional knowledge and genetic information are complements in the production of R&D, a resolution of the property rights failure in genetic information also may resolve the allocation failure in traditional knowledge even in the absence of a distinct property right. The reason is that traditional knowledge of the nature of private information is comparable to a trade secret. Traditional knowledge holders may use this informational advantage to improve their benefit by capturing some informational rent. A new property right is important to enable bargaining and coordination to occur across the industry, but a single property right is probably sufficient to enable coordination between the two agents.

Suggested Citation

  • Timothy Swanson & Mare Sarr, 2012. "Intellectual Property and Biodiversity: When and Where are Property Rights important?," CIES Research Paper series 10-2012, Centre for International Environmental Studies, The Graduate Institute.
  • Handle: RePEc:gii:ciesrp:cies_rp_10
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://repec.graduateinstitute.ch/pdfs/ciesrp/CIES_RP_10.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Sarr, Mare & Goeschl, Timo & Swanson, Tim, 2008. "The value of conserving genetic resources for R&D: A survey," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 67(2), pages 184-193, September.
    2. Hart, Oliver & Moore, John, 1990. "Property Rights and the Nature of the Firm," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 98(6), pages 1119-1158, December.
    3. Gordon C. Rausser & Arthur A. Small, 2000. "Valuing Research Leads: Bioprospecting and the Conservation of Genetic Resources," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 108(1), pages 173-206, February.
    4. Lerner, Josh & Merges, Robert P, 1998. "The Control of Technology Alliances: An Empirical Analysis of the Biotechnology Industry," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 46(2), pages 125-156, June.
    5. Grossman, Sanford J & Hart, Oliver D, 1986. "The Costs and Benefits of Ownership: A Theory of Vertical and Lateral Integration," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 94(4), pages 691-719, August.
    6. Simpson, R David & Sedjo, Roger A & Reid, John W, 1996. "Valuing Biodiversity for Use in Pharmaceutical Research," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 104(1), pages 163-185, February.
    7. Suzanne Scotchmer, 1996. "Protecting Early Innovators: Should Second-Generation Products Be Patentable?," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 27(2), pages 322-331, Summer.
    8. Josh Lerner & Robert P. Merges, 1998. "The Control of Technology Alliances: An Empirical Analysis of the Biotechnology Industry," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 46(2), pages 125-156, June.
    9. Francine Lafontaine & Margaret E. Slade, 1998. "Incentive Contracting and the Franchise Decision," NBER Working Papers 6544, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    10. Costello, Christopher & Ward, Michael, 2006. "Search, bioprospecting and biodiversity conservation," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 52(3), pages 615-626, November.
    11. Rothaermel, Frank T., 2001. "Complementary assets, strategic alliances, and the incumbent's advantage: an empirical study of industry and firm effects in the biopharmaceutical industry," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 30(8), pages 1235-1251, October.
    12. KINUKAWA Shinya & MOTOHASHI Kazuyuki, 2010. "Bargaining in Technology Markets: An empirical study of biotechnology alliances," Discussion papers 10020, Research Institute of Economy, Trade and Industry (RIETI).
    13. Francine Lafontaine & Margaret Slade, 2007. "Vertical Integration and Firm Boundaries: The Evidence," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 45(3), pages 629-685, September.
    14. Perry, Martin K, 1978. "Vertical Integration: The Monopsony Case," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 68(4), pages 561-570, September.
    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. Tim Swanson & Ben Groom, 2012. "Regulating global biodiversity: what is the problem?," Oxford Review of Economic Policy, Oxford University Press and Oxford Review of Economic Policy Limited, vol. 28(1), pages 114-138, Spring.
    2. Timothy Swanson & Ben Groom, 2012. "Regulating Biodiversity: What is the Problem?," CIES Research Paper series 08-2012, Centre for International Environmental Studies, The Graduate Institute.

    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. Victor Aguirregabiria & Margaret Slade, 2017. "Empirical models of firms and industries," Canadian Journal of Economics, Canadian Economics Association, vol. 50(5), pages 1445-1488, December.
    2. Beshears, John, 2013. "The performance of corporate alliances: Evidence from oil and gas drilling in the Gulf of Mexico," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 110(2), pages 324-346.
    3. Markus Solf, 2004. "Unternehmenskooperationen als Folge von Informations- und Kommunikations-technologieveränderungen: Eine theoretische Analyse," Schmalenbach Journal of Business Research, Springer, vol. 56(2), pages 146-167, March.
    4. Kim, Jongwook & Mahoney, Joseph T., 2008. "A Strategic Theory of the Firm as a Nexus of Incomplete Contracts: A Property Rights Approach," Working Papers 08-0108, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, College of Business.
    5. Patrick Legros & Andrew F. Newman, 2008. "Competing for Ownership," Journal of the European Economic Association, MIT Press, vol. 6(6), pages 1279-1308, December.
    6. Devarakonda, Ramakrishna & Reuer, Jeffrey J. & Tadikonda, Harsha, 2022. "Founder social capital and value appropriation in R&D alliance agreements," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 51(4).
    7. Umit Ozmel & Deniz Yavuz & Jeffrey J. Reuer & Todd Zenger, 2017. "Network Prominence, Bargaining Power, and the Allocation of Value Capturing Rights in High-Tech Alliance Contracts," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 28(5), pages 947-964, October.
    8. Ji Youn (Rose) Kim & Haemin Dennis Park, 2017. "Two Faces of Early Corporate Venture Capital Funding: Promoting Innovation and Inhibiting IPOs," Strategy Science, INFORMS, vol. 2(3), pages 161-175, September.
    9. Wenjuan Cheng & Alessio D’Amato & Giacomo Pallante, 2020. "Benefit sharing mechanisms for agricultural genetic diversity use and on-farm conservation," Economia Politica: Journal of Analytical and Institutional Economics, Springer;Fondazione Edison, vol. 37(1), pages 337-355, April.
    10. Josh Lerner & Ulrike Malmendier, 2010. "Contractibility and the Design of Research Agreements," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 100(1), pages 214-246, March.
    11. Lim, Wooyoung, 2012. "Selling authority," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 84(1), pages 393-415.
    12. Hu, Y. & Hendrikse, G.W.J., 2007. "Allocation of Decision Rights in Fruit and Vegetable Contracts in China," ERIM Report Series Research in Management ERS-2007-077-ORG, Erasmus Research Institute of Management (ERIM), ERIM is the joint research institute of the Rotterdam School of Management, Erasmus University and the Erasmus School of Economics (ESE) at Erasmus University Rotterdam.
    13. F. Andrew Hanssen & James W. Meehan Jr & Thomas J. Miceli, 2016. "Explaining Changes in Organizational Form," Journal of Sports Economics, , vol. 17(6), pages 523-557, August.
    14. Lim, Wooyoung, 2014. "Communication in bargaining over decision rights," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 85(C), pages 159-179.
    15. Oliver Hart, 2001. "Financial Contracting," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 39(4), pages 1079-1100, December.
    16. Catherine Magelssen, 2020. "Allocation of property rights and technological innovation within firms," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 41(4), pages 758-787, April.
    17. Sviatoslav A. Moskalev & R. Bruce Swensen, 2007. "Joint ventures around the globe from 1990–2000: Forms, types, industries, countries and ownership patterns," Review of Financial Economics, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 16(1), pages 29-67.
    18. Paija, Laura, 2004. "Allocation of Control Rights to Customised Products: Empirical Analysis of Finnish SMEs," Discussion Papers 918, The Research Institute of the Finnish Economy.
    19. Paija, Laura, 2003. "Distribution of Intellectual Property Rights and the Development of Technology Suppliers," Discussion Papers 844, The Research Institute of the Finnish Economy.
    20. Panico, Claudio, 2011. "On the contractual governance of research collaborations: Allocating control and intellectual property rights in the shadow of potential termination," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 40(10), pages 1403-1411.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Biodiversity Prospecting; Traditional Knowledge; Genetic Resources; Intellectual Property Rights; Sequential R&D;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • Q56 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Environmental Economics - - - Environment and Development; Environment and Trade; Sustainability; Environmental Accounts and Accounting; Environmental Equity; Population Growth
    • O34 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights - - - Intellectual Property and Intellectual Capital
    • L24 - Industrial Organization - - Firm Objectives, Organization, and Behavior - - - Contracting Out; Joint Ventures

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:gii:ciesrp:cies_rp_10. 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: Kristine Kjeldsen (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/ciheich.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.