IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ags/midasp/11821.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Is Agricultural Research Still A Public Good?

Author

Listed:
  • Oehmke, James F.
  • Weatherspoon, Dave D.
  • Wolf, Christopher A.
  • Naseem, Anwar
  • Maredia, Mywish K.
  • Hightower, Amie L.

Abstract

The nature of public agricultural research changed in 1980 when the Bayh-Dole Act allowed universities to retain title to inventions that were created with Federal funds, and the court case Diamond v. Chakrabarty allowed patenting of living tissue and eventually other bio-engineered products. In 1997, over 2,300 new licenses and options were executed on academic life-sciences property. This raises the questions agricultural research still be a public good? This paper is a critical first step in understanding how increasingly private ownership of intellectual property affects the agribusiness environment and the evolving role of public agricultural research institutions. The innovative step in this paper is the development of a formal economic model which represents the role of applied biotech research in the agricultural life sciences. The model is built around neo-Schumpeterian ideas of endogenous innovation and growth. The most salient implications for the role of the public sector are(1)The private sector underinvests in applied R&D activity. (2) Concentration in the large-firm, life-science R&D industry increases over time. (3) The life-science revolution is reducing the number of markets, in the short run. This reduction in the number of niche markets diminishes the role of the public sector. (4) There is a role for the public sector in conducting R&D in niche markets. (5) In the long run, the life-science revolution may also create new niche markets. (6) There is a role for the public sector in the provision of basic research which increases the productivity of applied R&D.

Suggested Citation

  • Oehmke, James F. & Weatherspoon, Dave D. & Wolf, Christopher A. & Naseem, Anwar & Maredia, Mywish K. & Hightower, Amie L., 1999. "Is Agricultural Research Still A Public Good?," Staff Papers 11821, Michigan State University, Department of Agricultural, Food, and Resource Economics.
  • Handle: RePEc:ags:midasp:11821
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://purl.umn.edu/11821
    Download Restriction: no

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Giancarlo Moschini & Harvey Lapan, 1997. "Intellectual Property Rights and the Welfare Effects of Agricultural R&D," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 79(4), pages 1229-1242.
    2. Aghion, Philippe & Howitt, Peter, 1992. "A Model of Growth through Creative Destruction," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 60(2), pages 323-351, March.
    3. Segerstrom, Paul S & Anant, T C A & Dinopoulos, Elias, 1990. "A Schumpeterian Model of the Product Life Cycle," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 80(5), pages 1077-1091, December.
    4. Dinopoulos, Elias & Oehmke, James F. & Segerstrom, Paul S., 1993. "High-technology-industry trade and investment : The role of factor endowments," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 34(1-2), pages 49-71, February.
    5. Mingxia Zhang, 1997. "The Effects of Imperfect Competition on the Size and Distribution of Research Benefits," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 79(4), pages 1252-1265.
    6. Shu-Yu Huang & Richard J. Sexton, 1996. "Measuring Returns to an Innovation in an Imperfectly Competitive Market: Application to Mechanical Harvesting of Processing Tomatoes in Taiwan," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 78(3), pages 558-571.
    7. Alston, Julian M. & Sexton, Richard J. & Zhang, Mingxia, 1999. "Imperfect competition, functional forms, and the size and distribution of research benefits," Agricultural Economics, Blackwell, vol. 21(2), pages 155-172, October.
    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. Bradford Barham & Jeremy Foltz & Kwansoo Kim, 2002. "Trends in University Ag-Biotech Patent Production," Review of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 24(2), pages 294-308.
    2. Xia, Yin & Buccola, Steven T., 2001. "Are Basic Science And Biotechnology Complementary Activities?," 2001 Annual meeting, August 5-8, Chicago, IL 20575, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
    3. Esposti, Roberto, 0. "Knowledge, Technology and Innovations for a Bio-based Economy: Lessons from the Past, Challenges for the Future," Bio-based and Applied Economics Journal, Italian Association of Agricultural and Applied Economics (AIEAA), issue 3.
    4. Michael J. Rizzo, 2005. "The public interest in higher education," Proceedings, Federal Reserve Bank of Cleveland, pages 19-45.
    5. Oehmke, James F. & Wolf, Christopher A. & Weatherspoon, Dave D. & Naseem, Anwar & Maredia, Mywish K. & Raper, Kellie Curry & Hightower, Amie L., 1999. "Cyclical Concentration And Biotech R&D Activity: A Neo-Schumpeterian Model," Staff Papers 11792, Michigan State University, Department of Agricultural, Food, and Resource Economics.
    6. Oehmke, James F. & Wolf, Christopher A. & Weatherspoon, Dave D. & Naseem, Anwar & Maredia, Mywish K. & Raper, Kellie Curry & Hightower, Amie L., 1999. "Cyclical Concentration And Consolidation In Biotech R&D: A Neo-Schumpeterian Model," Staff Papers 11812, Michigan State University, Department of Agricultural, Food, and Resource Economics.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Research and Development/Tech Change/Emerging Technologies;

    JEL classification:

    • Q13 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Agriculture - - - Agricultural Markets and Marketing; Cooperatives; Agribusiness
    • O34 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights - - - Intellectual Property and Intellectual Capital
    • L10 - Industrial Organization - - Market Structure, Firm Strategy, and Market Performance - - - General

    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:midasp:11821. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (AgEcon Search). General contact details of provider: http://edirc.repec.org/data/damsuus.html .

    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 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.

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.