IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/hal/journl/hal-02792814.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Plant Breeders' Rights, Patents and Incentives to Innovate

Author

Listed:
  • Adrien Hervouet

    (GAEL - Laboratoire d'Economie Appliquée = Grenoble Applied Economics Laboratory - UPMF - Université Pierre Mendès France - Grenoble 2 - INRA - Institut National de la Recherche Agronomique - CNRS - Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique)

  • Corinne Langinier

    (University of Alberta)

Abstract

Innovations on plant varieties can be protected by patents or Plant Breeders’ Rights (PBRs). Although these methods of protection have similarities, they also have major differences. With the PBR regime, farmers are allowed to save part of their harvest to replant during the next period (“farmers’ exemption”). To comply with international regulation, they must pay a tax to seed producers for the loss incurred due to this exemption. We analyze the impact of this exemption and its associated tax on seed prices and on the incentives to innovate in a monopoly setting. We find that with only a PBR regime, a relatively high tax level is necessary to eliminate self-production. If both patent and PBR regimes coexist, farmers might still self-produce if the seed innovation is protected with a PBR. Our findings suggest that the coexistence of the two regimes does not fully prevent self-production. Nevertheless, it boosts the research investment which is a non-monotonic function of the tax. The seed producer might over or under invest compared to what is socially optimal. Moreover, incentives to innovate are the strongest, either with a patent regime or with a PBR regime for which a high tax prevents seed saving. In terms of welfare, having both systems has ambiguous effects.
(This abstract was borrowed from another version of this item.)

Suggested Citation

  • Adrien Hervouet & Corinne Langinier, 2014. "Plant Breeders' Rights, Patents and Incentives to Innovate," Post-Print hal-02792814, HAL.
  • Handle: RePEc:hal:journl:hal-02792814
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    To our knowledge, this item is not available for download. To find whether it is available, there are three options:
    1. Check below whether another version of this item is available online.
    2. Check on the provider's web page whether it is in fact available.
    3. Perform a search for a similarly titled item that would be available.

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Fuglie, Keith O. & Heisey, Paul W. & King, John L. & Day-Rubenstein, Kelly & Schimmelpfennig, David & Wang, Sun Ling, 2011. "Research Investments and Market Structure in the Food Processing, Agricultural Input, and Biofuel Industries Worldwide: Executive Summary," Economic Information Bulletin 291936, United States Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service.
    2. Giancarlo Moschini & Harvey Lapan & Andrei Sobolevsky, 2000. "Roundup ready® soybeans and welfare effects in the soybean complex," Agribusiness, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 16(1), pages 33-55.
    3. Baudry Marc & Hervouet Adrien, 2016. "Innovation in the Seed Market: The Role of IPRs and Commercialization Rules," Journal of Agricultural & Food Industrial Organization, De Gruyter, vol. 14(1), pages 51-68, May.
    4. Khachaturyan, Marianna & Yiannaka, Amalia, 2006. "The market acceptance and welfare impacts of genetic use restriction technologies (GURTS)," 98th Seminar, June 29-July 2, 2006, Chania, Crete, Greece 10097, European Association of Agricultural Economists.
    5. 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.
    6. Schankerman, Mark & Pakes, Ariel, 1986. "Estimates of the Value of Patent Rights in European Countries during the Post-1950 Period," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 96(384), pages 1052-1076, December.
    7. Stefan Ambec & Corinne Langinier & Stéphane Lemarié, 2008. "Incentives to Reduce Crop Trait Durability," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 90(2), pages 379-391.
    8. GianCarlo Moschini & Oleg Yerokhin, 2008. "Patents, Research Exemption, and the Incentive for Sequential Innovation," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 17(2), pages 379-412, June.
    9. Michael Waldman, 2003. "Durable Goods Theory for Real World Markets," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 17(1), pages 131-154, Winter.
    10. Lence, Sergio H. & Hayes, Dermot J. & Alston, Julian & Smith, J. Stephen C., 2015. "Intellectual Property in Plant Breeding: Comparing Different Levels and Forms of Protection," Staff General Research Papers Archive 38978, Iowa State University, Department of Economics.
    11. Fuglie, Keith O. & Heisey, Paul W. & King, John L. & Day-Rubenstein, Kelly A. & Schimmelpfennig, David E. & Wang, Sun Ling, 2011. "Research Investments and Market Structure in the Food Processing, Agricultural Input, and Biofuel Industries Worldwide," Economic Research Report 120324, United States Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service.
    12. Anonymous, 1962. "Economic and Social Council," International Organization, Cambridge University Press, vol. 16(3), pages 587-596, July.
    13. Wright, Brian D. & Pardey, Philip G. & Nottenburg, Carol & Koo, Bonwoo, 2007. "Agricultural Innovation: Investments and Incentives," Handbook of Agricultural Economics, in: Robert Evenson & Prabhu Pingali (ed.), Handbook of Agricultural Economics, edition 1, volume 3, chapter 48, pages 2533-2603, Elsevier.
    14. Robert Evenson & Prabhu Pingali (ed.), 2007. "Handbook of Agricultural Economics," Handbook of Agricultural Economics, Elsevier, edition 1, volume 3, number 1.
    15. Marc Baudry & Adrien Hervouet, 2016. "Innovation in the Seed Market: The Role of IPRs and Commercialization Rules," Post-Print hal-01386009, HAL.
    16. Anonymous, 1962. "Economic and Social Council," International Organization, Cambridge University Press, vol. 16(1), pages 195-216, January.
    17. Kenneth Arrow, 1962. "Economic Welfare and the Allocation of Resources for Invention," NBER Chapters, in: The Rate and Direction of Inventive Activity: Economic and Social Factors, pages 609-626, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    18. Carew, Richard & Smith, Elwin G. & Grant, Cynthia, 2009. "Factors Influencing Wheat Yield and Variability: Evidence from Manitoba, Canada," Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics, Southern Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 41(3), pages 1-15, December.
    19. Srinivasan, Chittur S., 2012. "Modelling Economic Returns to Plant Variety Protection in the UK," Bio-based and Applied Economics Journal, Italian Association of Agricultural and Applied Economics (AIEAA), vol. 1(2), pages 1-24, August.
    20. Carew, Richard & Smith, Elwin G. & Grant, Cynthia, 2009. "Factors Influencing Wheat Yield and Variability: Evidence from Manitoba, Canada," Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 41(3), pages 625-639, December.
    21. Trommetter, M., 2008. "Intellectual property rights in agricultural and agro-food biotechnologies to 2030 (© OECD International Futures Programme)," Working Papers 200805, Grenoble Applied Economics Laboratory (GAEL).
    22. Bulow, Jeremy I, 1982. "Durable-Goods Monopolists," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 90(2), pages 314-332, April.
    23. Ambec, Stefan & Langinier, Corinne & Lemarie, Stephane, 2008. "AJAE Appendix: Incentives to Reduce Crop Trait Durability," American Journal of Agricultural Economics APPENDICES, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 90(2), pages 1-11.
    24. José Benjamin Falck-Zepeda & Greg Traxler & Robert G. Nelson, 2000. "Surplus Distribution from the Introduction of a Biotechnology Innovation," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 82(2), pages 360-369.
    25. Anonymous, 1962. "Economic and Social Council," International Organization, Cambridge University Press, vol. 16(4), pages 835-844, October.
    26. Coase, Ronald H, 1972. "Durability and Monopoly," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 15(1), pages 143-149, April.
    27. Matin Qaim & Greg Traxler, 2005. "Roundup Ready soybeans in Argentina: farm level and aggregate welfare effects," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 32(1), pages 73-86, January.
    28. Suzanne Scotchmer, 1991. "Standing on the Shoulders of Giants: Cumulative Research and the Patent Law," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 5(1), pages 29-41, Winter.
    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. Ting Meng & Richard Carew & Wojciech J. Florkowski, 2020. "Determinants of the grant lag and the surrender lag of horticultural crop plant breeders’ rights applications: Survival analysis with competing risks," Canadian Journal of Agricultural Economics/Revue canadienne d'agroeconomie, Canadian Agricultural Economics Society/Societe canadienne d'agroeconomie, vol. 68(4), pages 489-512, December.
    2. Adrien Hervouet & Stéphane Lemarié, 2023. "The Economics of Royalty Rates in Plant Breeding," Working Papers 2023-03, Grenoble Applied Economics Laboratory (GAEL).
    3. Mehdi Arzandeh & Derek G. Brewin, 2021. "R&D Investments in Plant Breeding under Changing Intellectual Property Rights," International Journal of Economics and Financial Issues, Econjournals, vol. 11(6), pages 32-47.

    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. Hervouet, Adrien & Langinier, Corinne, 2018. "Plant Breeders’ Rights, Patents, and Incentives to Innovate," Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Western Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 43(1), January.
    2. Marc Baudry & Adrien Hervouet, 2017. "The private value of plant variety protection and the impact of exemption rules," Economics of Innovation and New Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 26(3), pages 202-226, April.
    3. Baudry Marc & Hervouet Adrien, 2016. "Innovation in the Seed Market: The Role of IPRs and Commercialization Rules," Journal of Agricultural & Food Industrial Organization, De Gruyter, vol. 14(1), pages 51-68, May.
    4. Richard S. Gray, 2021. "In defense of farmer saved seeds," Review of Agricultural, Food and Environmental Studies, Springer, vol. 102(4), pages 451-460, December.
    5. Adrien Hervouet & Marc Baudry, 2011. "Promoting innovation in the seed market and biodiversity: the role of IPRs and commercialization rules," Post-Print hal-02012239, HAL.
    6. Clément Bonnet, 2016. "Revisiting the optimal patent policy tradeoff for environmental technologies," EconomiX Working Papers 2016-34, University of Paris Nanterre, EconomiX.
    7. Stefan Ambec & Corinne Langinier & Stéphane Lemarié, 2008. "Incentives to Reduce Crop Trait Durability," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 90(2), pages 379-391.
    8. Anabela Santos & Michele Cincera & Paulo Neto & Maria Manuel Serrano, 2019. "How internationalization and competitiveness contribute to get public support to innovation? The Portuguese case," GEE Papers 0121, Gabinete de Estratégia e Estudos, Ministério da Economia, revised May 2019.
    9. Anders Gustafsson & Andreas Stephan & Alice Hallman & Nils Karlsson, 2016. "The “sugar rush” from innovation subsidies: a robust political economy perspective," Empirica, Springer;Austrian Institute for Economic Research;Austrian Economic Association, vol. 43(4), pages 729-756, November.
    10. Li, Qing & Zhang, Huaige & Hong, Xianpei, 2020. "Knowledge structure of technology licensing based on co-keywords network: A review and future directions," International Review of Economics & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 66(C), pages 154-165.
    11. Jean-Marc Fournier, 2016. "The Positive Effect of Public Investment on Potential Growth," OECD Economics Department Working Papers 1347, OECD Publishing.
    12. Cozzarin, Brian P., 2008. "Data and the measurement of R&D program impacts," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 31(3), pages 284-298, August.
    13. Adrien Hervouet & Stéphane Lemarié, 2023. "The Economics of Royalty Rates in Plant Breeding," Working Papers 2023-03, Grenoble Applied Economics Laboratory (GAEL).
    14. Andrew T. Ching & Hyunwoo Lim, 2020. "A Structural Model of Correlated Learning and Late-Mover Advantages: The Case of Statins," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 66(3), pages 1095-1123, March.
    15. Philippe Aghion & Stefan Bechtold & Lea Cassar & Holger Herz, 2018. "The Causal Effects of Competition on Innovation: Experimental Evidence," The Journal of Law, Economics, and Organization, Oxford University Press, vol. 34(2), pages 162-195.
    16. Fengqing Zhang & Erjia Yan & Xin Niu & Yongjun Zhu, 2018. "Joint modeling of the association between NIH funding and its three primary outcomes: patents, publications, and citation impact," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 117(1), pages 591-602, October.
    17. Federico Dulcich, 2018. "Desarrollo y adopción de tecnología: ¿la nueva dicotomía de la división internacional del trabajo?," Revista Cuadernos de Economia, Universidad Nacional de Colombia, FCE, CID, vol. 37(74), pages 315-352, July.
    18. Spielman, David J. & Smale, Melinda, 2017. "Policy options to accelerate variety change among smallholder farmers in South Asia and Africa South of the Sahara," IFPRI discussion papers 1666, International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI).
    19. Michele Cincera & Ela Ince & Anabela Marques Santos, 2019. "Competition and Innovation: Evidence from Worldwide Corporate R&D Spenders," Working Papers TIMES² 2019-33, ULB -- Universite Libre de Bruxelles.
    20. Weidong Meng & Ye Wang & Yuyu Li & Bo Huang, 2020. "Impact of product subsidies on R&D investment for new energy vehicle firms: Considering quality preference of the early adopter group," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(7), pages 1-14, July.

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • D23 - Microeconomics - - Production and Organizations - - - Organizational Behavior; Transaction Costs; Property Rights
    • K11 - Law and Economics - - Basic Areas of Law - - - Property Law
    • L12 - Industrial Organization - - Market Structure, Firm Strategy, and Market Performance - - - Monopoly; Monopolization Strategies
    • Q12 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Agriculture - - - Micro Analysis of Farm Firms, Farm Households, and Farm Input Markets

    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:hal:journl:hal-02792814. 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: CCSD (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/ .

    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.