IDEAS home Printed from
MyIDEAS: Log in (now much improved!) to save this paper

The Evolving Landscape of IP Rights for Plant Varieties in the United States, 1930-2008

Listed author(s):
  • Pardey, Philip G.
  • Koo, Bonwoo
  • Drew, Jennifer
  • Nottenburg, Carol

The United States was the first country in the world to explicitly offer intellectual property protection for plant varieties. Beginning in 1930, asexually reproduced plants were afforded plant patent protection, in 1970 sexually propagated plants could be awarded plant variety protection certificates, and beginning in 1985, courts confirmed that varieties of all types of plants were eligible for utility patents. From 1930 to 2008, a total of 34,340 varietal rights applications were lodged. The number of rights being sought continues to grow, with 42 percent of all the varietal rights claimed since 2000. Contrary to popular perception, most of these rights are for horticultural crops (69 percent), with ornamentals accounting for the lion’s share of the horticulture-related rights (73 percent, or 50 percent of all plant rights). Food and feed crops constitute only 24 percent of the rights sought, although just two crops (corn and soybean) made up 84 percent of the 3,719 varietal rights claimed via utility patents. The structure of these rights has changed dramatically over the years. During the 1930s when the only rights on offer were plant patents, 72 percent of the rights sought were for ornamental crops and individual innovators played a substantial role (50 percent of the rights). By 2004-2008, the annual applications for plant patents had increased in number but fallen to a 60 percent share of the total rights claimed. During this recent period, utility patents were as popular as plant variety protection certificates, and ornamentals made up a large but much reduced share of the total (52 percent). Individual innovators accounted for only 12 percent of the rights, whereas the corporate sector sought the dominant share of varietal rights (82 percent in 2004-2008). These intellectual property markets are complex, with corporations, universities and other agencies seeking different types of rights for different crops.

If 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.

File URL:
Download Restriction: no

Paper provided by University of Minnesota, Department of Applied Economics in its series Staff Papers with number 119346.

in new window

Date of creation: 02 Jan 2012
Handle: RePEc:ags:umaesp:119346
Contact details of provider: Postal:
231ClaOff Building, 1994 Buford Avenue, St. Paul, MN 55108-6040

Phone: (612) 625-1222
Fax: (612) 625-6245
Web page:

More information through EDIRC

References listed on IDEAS
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.:

in new window

  1. Jones, Carol Adaire & El-Osta, Hisham S. & Green, Robert C., 2006. "Economic Well-Being of Farm Households," Economic Brief 34095, United States Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service.
  2. Alston, Julian M. & Venner, Raymond J., 2002. "The effects of the US Plant Variety Protection Act on wheat genetic improvement," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 31(4), pages 527-542, May.
  3. Alan C. Marco & Gordon C. Rausser, 2008. "The Role of Patent Rights in Mergers: Consolidation in Plant Biotechnology," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 90(1), pages 133-151.
  4. Alan C. Marco & Gordon C. Rausser, 2008. "The Role of Patent Rights in Mergers: Consolidation in Plant Biotechnology," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 90(1), pages 133-151.
  5. Bessen, James, 2008. "The value of U.S. patents by owner and patent characteristics," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(5), pages 932-945, June.
  6. Deepthi Elizabeth Kolady & William Lesser, 2009. "But are they Meritorious? Genetic Productivity Gains under Plant Intellectual Property Rights," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 60(1), pages 62-79.
Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ags:umaesp:119346. 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)

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 references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link 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 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.

This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis using RePEc data.