Using Traditional Knowledge for Commercial Innovations: Incentives, Bargaining and Community Profits
AbstractThe recent interest in traditional knowledge systems within health care and biodiversity sectors is directly related to the profitable innovations that traditional knowledge can generate. This paper seeks to examine the nature of economic incentives required for protecting and sustainably using traditional knowledge. The paper asks two key questions: (a) under what conditions do communities and pharmaceutical companies enter into contracts to develop traditional knowledge-based innovations? And, (b) what factors influence the benefit-shares of the two parties from commercial use of traditional knowledge? Adapting a bargaining model, this paper shows that the actual sharing of the revenues depends on a number of issues, most importantly, the relative bargaining strengths of the two parties. Factors that affect profits and relative bargaining strengths include the contributions of the parties in developing the innovation, the availability of alternative sources and options, differences in expectations over future revenues and costs, and the involvement of a third party in the negotiations. Such factors need to be taken into account in designing incentive schemes that can help communities benefit from the use of their traditional knowledge.
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 The South Asian Network for Development and Environmental Economics in its series Working papers with number 70.
Date of creation:
Date of revision:
Contact details of provider:
Postal: South Asian Network for Development and Environmental Economics PO Box: 8975, EPC: 1056 Kathmandu, Nepal
This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:
- NEP-AGR-2012-11-03 (Agricultural Economics)
- NEP-ALL-2012-11-03 (All new papers)
- NEP-ENV-2012-11-03 (Environmental Economics)
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.:
- Adger, W. Neil & Luttrell, Cecilia, 2000. "Property rights and the utilisation of wetlands," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 35(1), pages 75-89, October.
- 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.
- Edella Schlager & Elinor Ostrom, 1992. "Property-Rights Regimes and Natural Resources: A Conceptual Analysis," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 68(3), pages 249-262.
- Marc Jacobson & Joel De Castro & Vianca Aliaga & Julio Romero & MAllison Davis, 1998. "The Role of Tenure Security and Private Time Preference in Neotropical Deforestation," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 74(2), pages 162-170.
- Alexander Karaivanov, 2009. "Heterogeneity, returns to scale, and collective action," Canadian Journal of Economics, Canadian Economics Association, vol. 42(2), pages 771-807, May.
- Kant, Shashi, 2000. "A dynamic approach to forest regimes in developing economies," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 32(2), pages 287-300, February.
- Dayton-Johnson, Jeff, 2000. "Determinants of collective action on the local commons: a model with evidence from Mexico," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 62(1), pages 181-208, June.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Anuradhak).
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.