IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/ags/ajaees/367845.html

A Comprehensive Review on the Impacts of Intellectual Property Rights on the Global Agricultural Economy

Author

Listed:
  • Meghwal, Manohar Lal
  • Dhurve, Lalit
  • Raj, Sumit
  • Afreen, Nahida
  • Abhijeet
  • Tripathi, Somdutt
  • Maurya, Durgesh Kumar
  • Kumar, Arun

Abstract

The agricultural sector is no stranger to the importance of intellectual property, as it serves as a catalyst for innovation, facilitates the transfer of technology, and safeguards the rights of creators and inventors. By examining the effects of IPRs on various dimensions, this paper seeks to shed light on the far-reaching implications for the agricultural industry worldwide. First and foremost, the review explores the intricate relationship between IPRs and agricultural research and development. IPRs are known to provide essential incentives for scientists and researchers to engage in ground-breaking agri-scientific endeavors, leading to advancements in productivity, sustainability, and food security. By offering legal protection and rewards for their innovations, IPRs encourage investment in agricultural R&D, driving progress in crop improvement, genetics, and biotechnology. Furthermore, the review delves into the impact of IPRs on farmers' access to seeds and genetic resources. While strong intellectual property regimes ensure fair compensation for breeders and innovators, concerns arise regarding the potentially limited access to seeds, especially for small-scale farmers in developing countries. Balancing the rights of breeders and the needs of farmers becomes a crucial aspect of agricultural policy formulation, aiming for a sustainable and inclusive agricultural system. Additionally, the review scrutinizes how IPRs affect the overall competitiveness of the agricultural market. IPRs enable agricultural enterprises to gain a competitive advantage through exclusive rights over their unique plant varieties, processes, or technologies. However, the high costs associated with intellectual property protection may pose barriers for smaller farmers and agricultural communities, exacerbating inequalities within the sector. While intellectual property rights undoubtedly play a vital role in fostering agricultural innovation and protection, the review also sheds light on the challenges and controversies associated with IPRs. The potential negative impacts on small-scale farmers, the concerns surrounding access to genetic resources, and the implications for biodiversity conservation all warrant careful consideration in the formulation of IPR policies. Through a comprehensive analysis of scholarly articles, reports, and case studies, this review provides valuable insights for policymakers, stakeholders, and researchers concerned with the multifaceted impacts of intellectual property rights on the global agricultural economy. By understanding these complexities, it becomes possible to strike a balance that maximizes the benefits of IPRs while ensuring equitable and sustainable agricultural development.

Suggested Citation

  • Meghwal, Manohar Lal & Dhurve, Lalit & Raj, Sumit & Afreen, Nahida & Abhijeet & Tripathi, Somdutt & Maurya, Durgesh Kumar & Kumar, Arun, 2023. "A Comprehensive Review on the Impacts of Intellectual Property Rights on the Global Agricultural Economy," Asian Journal of Agricultural Extension, Economics & Sociology, Asian Journal of Agricultural Extension, Economics & Sociology, vol. 41(12), pages 1-13.
    • Handle: RePEc:ags:ajaees:367845
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/367845/files/Kumar41122023AJAEES110365.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Chih‐Hai Yang & Rhung‐Jieh Woo, 2006. "Do stronger intellectual property rights induce more agricultural trade?: a dynamic panel data model applied to seed trade," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 35(1), pages 91-101, July.
    2. Ganguli, Prabuddha, 1999. "Towards TRIPs compliance in India: The Patents Amendment Act 1999 and implications," World Patent Information, Elsevier, vol. 21(4), pages 279-287, December.
    3. van Zeebroeck, Nicolas & van Pottelsberghe de la Potterie, Bruno & Guellec, Dominique, 2009. "Claiming more: the Increased Voluminosity of Patent Applications and its Determinants," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(6), pages 1006-1020, July.
    4. Salazar, Rene & Louwaars, Niels P. & Visser, Bert, 2007. "Protecting Farmers' New Varieties: New Approaches to Rights on Collective Innovations in Plant Genetic Resources," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 35(9), pages 1515-1528, September.
    5. Juma, Calestous, 2015. "The New Harvest: Agricultural Innovation in Africa," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, number 9780190237233.
    6. Valentine Millot, 2009. "Trademarks as an Indicator of Product and Marketing Innovations," OECD Science, Technology and Industry Working Papers 2009/6, OECD Publishing.
    7. Brush, Stephen B., 2007. "Farmers' Rights and Protection of Traditional Agricultural Knowledge," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 35(9), pages 1499-1514, September.
    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. Jellason, Nugun P. & Robinson, Elizabeth J. Z. & Ogbaga, Chukwuma C., 2021. "Agriculture 4.0: is sub-Saharan Africa ready?," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 113550, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    2. Nicolas van Zeebroeck & Bruno van Pottelsberghe de la Potterie, 2011. "Filing strategies and patent value," Economics of Innovation and New Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 20(6), pages 539-561, February.
    3. Matthieu Mandard, 2013. "Profiting from collaborative innovation: R&D alliances and technological assets protection mechanisms [Profiter de l'innovation collaborative : alliances de R&D et mécanismes de protection des actifs technologiques]," Post-Print halshs-00846071, HAL.
    4. Harhoff, Dietmar & Hoisl, Karin & van Pottelsberghe de la Potterie, Bruno, 2009. "Languages, Fees and the International Scope of Patenting," Discussion Papers in Business Administration 10456, University of Munich, Munich School of Management.
    5. Yang, Bin & An, Zhe & Gao, Xin & Li, Donghui, 2023. "Trademarks and the cost of equity capital," Journal of Corporate Finance, Elsevier, vol. 83(C).
    6. Stuart J. H. Graham & Alan C. Marco & Amanda F. Myers, 2018. "Monetizing marks: Insights from the USPTO Trademark Assignment Dataset," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 27(3), pages 403-432, September.
    7. Jonathan H. Ashtor, 2019. "Investigating Cohort Similarity as an Ex Ante Alternative to Patent Forward Citations," Journal of Empirical Legal Studies, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 16(4), pages 848-880, December.
    8. Sebastien Lechevalier & Yukio Ikeda & Junichi Nishimura, 2010. "The effect of participation in government consortia on the R&D productivity of firms: a case study of robot technology in Japan," Economics of Innovation and New Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 19(8), pages 669-692.
    9. Michele Gazzola, 2017. "Multilingualism and the International Patent System: an Assessment of the Fairness of the Language Policy of WIPO," Journal of Industry, Competition and Trade, Springer, vol. 17(3), pages 349-369, September.
    10. de Rassenfosse, Gaetan & van Pottelsberghe de la Potterie, Bruno, 2009. "A policy insight into the R&D-patent relationship," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(5), pages 779-792, June.
    11. Dirk Crass & Franz Schwiebacher, 2017. "The importance of trademark protection for product differentiation and innovation," Economia e Politica Industriale: Journal of Industrial and Business Economics, Springer;Associazione Amici di Economia e Politica Industriale, vol. 44(2), pages 199-220, June.
    12. George Messinis, 2011. "Triadic citations, country biases and patent value: the case of pharmaceuticals," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 89(3), pages 813-833, December.
    13. Briggs Kristie, 2012. "Patents, Technology Adaptation, and Exports to Developing Countries," Global Economy Journal, De Gruyter, vol. 12(1), pages 1-20, March.
    14. Carolina Castaldi & Sandro Mendonca, 2021. "Regions and trademarks. Research opportunities and policy insights from leveraging trademarks in regional innovation studies," Papers in Evolutionary Economic Geography (PEEG) 2138, Utrecht University, Department of Human Geography and Spatial Planning, Group Economic Geography, revised Dec 2021.
    15. Renai Jiang & Shurui Hu & Zulong Su & Yincheng Huang & Huiwen Zhang, 2025. "Spatial and Temporal Evolution of Urban Patent Quality: Evidence From China Prefectural Cities," SAGE Open, , vol. 15(1), pages 21582440251, February.
    16. Gupeng, Zhang & Xiangdong, Chen, 2012. "The value of invention patents in China: Country origin and technology field differences," China Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 23(2), pages 357-370.
    17. Ventsislava Nikolova-Minkova, 2022. "Bulgarian and Foreign Trademark Activity in Bulgaria and Bulgarian Trademark Activity Abroad for the Period 2000-2019," Economic Studies journal, Bulgarian Academy of Sciences - Economic Research Institute, issue 2, pages 173-196.
    18. Benjamin Barber & Luis Diestre, 2022. "Can firms avoid tough patent examiners through examiner‐shopping? Strategic timing of citations in USPTO patent applications," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 43(9), pages 1854-1871, September.
    19. Richard Shearmur & Nicolas Bonnet, 2011. "Does local technological innovation lead to local development? A policy perspective," Regional Science Policy & Practice, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 3(3), pages 249-270, August.
    20. Munari, Federico & Toschi, Laura, 2014. "Running ahead in the nanotechnology gold rush. Strategic patenting in emerging technologies," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 83(C), pages 194-207.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;

    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:ags:ajaees:367845. 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://journalajaees.com/index.php/AJAEES/index .

    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.