IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/isu/genstf/201001010800001117.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Competition Issues in the Seed Industry and the Role of Intellectual Property

Author

Listed:
  • Moschini, Giancarlo

Abstract

The reawakened interest in competition issues in agricultural markets might appear to have found its ideal poster child in the seed industry. Concentration is high and market structure has shown remarkable dynamics over the last 15 years, with high-profile mergers and acquisitions by key players. A dominant firm—Monsanto—seems to have emerged, at least from the perspective of biotech traits perceived as essential in modern seed varieties. The two largest U.S. seed companies, DuPont and Monsanto, have embarked on a tough legal battle. And the Department of Justice (DOJ) has opened a formal antitrust investigation of Monsanto practices. Yet, despite its many motives of interest, the seed industry’s competition issues are probably not representative of what matters in other agricultural markets. A distinctive feature in the seed industry is that innovation is crucial and heavily dependent on sizeable research and development (R&D) investments. Commitment to R&D by private firms, in turn, relies crucially on the existence and enforcement of intellectual property rights (IPRs), patents in particular. Strong IPRs necessarily confer limited monopoly positions. Whereas that is well understood and widely accepted as a reasonable method to promote the provision of innovation by the private sector, there remains an inherent tension between IPR and antitrust concerns in this industry.

Suggested Citation

  • Moschini, Giancarlo, 2010. "Competition Issues in the Seed Industry and the Role of Intellectual Property," ISU General Staff Papers 201001010800001117, Iowa State University, Department of Economics.
    • Handle: RePEc:isu:genstf:201001010800001117
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://dr.lib.iastate.edu/server/api/core/bitstreams/183b5a6d-47fc-4743-aff8-8f613af680fc/content
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Moschini, GianCarlo & Yerokhin, Oleg, 2007. "Economics Incentive to Innovate in Plants: Patents and Plant Breeders' Rights, The," Staff General Research Papers Archive 12895, Iowa State University, Department of Economics.
    2. 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.
    3. GianCarlo Moschini, 2008. "Biotechnology and the development of food markets: retrospect and prospects," European Review of Agricultural Economics, Foundation for the European Review of Agricultural Economics, vol. 35(3), pages 331-355, September.
    4. 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.
    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. Chang, Ching-Wen & Yamanaka, Takayuki & Kano, Shingo, 2019. "An enforced loop-out knowledge flow facilitates industry competition: Learning from the pharmaceutical and genetically modified seed industries," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 79(C), pages 11-24.
    2. Federico Ciliberto & GianCarlo Moschini & Edward D. Perry, 2019. "Valuing product innovation: genetically engineered varieties in US corn and soybeans," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 50(3), pages 615-644, September.
    3. MacDonald, James M. & Dong, Xiao & Fuglie, Keith O., 2023. "Concentration and Competition in U.S. Agribusiness," Economic Information Bulletin 337566, United States Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service.
    4. Liu, Zhen & Kemp, Ron G.M. & Jongsma, Maarten A. & Huang, Caicheng & Dons, J.J.M. & Omta, S.W.F, 2014. "Key Success Factors of Innovation Projects of Vegetable Breeding Companies in China," International Food and Agribusiness Management Review, International Food and Agribusiness Management Association, vol. 17(4), pages 1-28, November.
    5. Abby Kelly & Kalyn T. Coatney & Xiaofei Li & Keith H. Coble, 2020. "Subsidy Incidence in the Presence of Bertrand Suppliers of Complementary Inputs: A U.S. Agricultural Example," Journal of Industry, Competition and Trade, Springer, vol. 20(3), pages 479-501, September.
    6. Poe, Abby & Coatney, Kalyn & Coble, Keith & Freeman, Matt, 2014. "Farm Subsidy Incidence in the Presence of Bertrand Competitors of Complementary Factors of Production: A Theoretical Approach," 2014 Annual Meeting, February 1-4, 2014, Dallas, Texas 162507, Southern Agricultural Economics Association.
    7. Lemarié Stéphane & Baghdasaryan Delia & Campens Etienne, 2017. "The Product Line Strategy of a Company Selling Seed with a Licensed GM Trait," Journal of Agricultural & Food Industrial Organization, De Gruyter, vol. 15(1), pages 1-15, January.

    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. Johan F.M.Swinnen & Thijs Vandemoortele, 2011. "On Butterflies and Frankenstein: A Dynamic Theory of Regulation," LICOS Discussion Papers 27611, LICOS - Centre for Institutions and Economic Performance, KU Leuven.
    2. Frisvold, George & Reeves, Jeanne, 2015. "Genetically Modified Crops: International Trade And Trade Policy Effects," International Journal of Food and Agricultural Economics (IJFAEC), Alanya Alaaddin Keykubat University, Department of Economics and Finance, vol. 3(2), pages 1-13, April.
    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.
    4. Bchir, Mohamed Hedi & Bouet, Antoine, 2009. "Which tariff aggregator for trade modelers?," Conference papers 331888, Purdue University, Center for Global Trade Analysis, Global Trade Analysis Project.
    5. Alston, Julian M. & Freebairn, John W. & James, Jennifer S., 2004. "Levy-funded research choices by producers and society," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 48(1), pages 1-32.
    6. Anne-Célia Disdier & Lionel Fontagné, 2010. "Trade impact of European measures on GMOs condemned by the WTO panel," Review of World Economics (Weltwirtschaftliches Archiv), Springer;Institut für Weltwirtschaft (Kiel Institute for the World Economy), vol. 146(3), pages 495-514, September.
    7. Hareau, Guy Gaston & Norton, George W. & Mills, Bradford F. & Peterson, Everett B., 2004. "Potential Benefits Of Transgenic Rice In Asia: A General Equilibrium Approach," 2004 Annual meeting, August 1-4, Denver, CO 20334, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
    8. 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.
    9. 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.
    10. Schimmelpfennig, David E. & Pray, Carl E. & Brennan, Margaret F., 2004. "The impact of seed industry concentration on innovation: a study of US biotech market leaders," Agricultural Economics, Blackwell, vol. 30(2), pages 157-167, March.
    11. Frisvold, George B. & Reeves, Jeanne M., 2008. "The costs and benefits of refuge requirements: The case of Bt cotton," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 65(1), pages 87-97, March.
    12. Lence, Sergio H. & Hayes, Dermot J. & McCunn, Alan & Smith, Stephen C. & Niebur, Bill, 2003. "Welfare Impacts of Property Rights in the Seed Industry," 2003 Annual meeting, July 27-30, Montreal, Canada 22187, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
    13. Naseem, Anwar & Singla, Rohit, 2013. "Ex Ante Economic Impact Analysis of Novel Traits in Canola," Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Western Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 38(2), pages 1-21, August.
    14. Qaim, Matin & de Janvry, Alain, 2002. "Bt Cotton In Argentina: Analyzing Adoption And Farmers' Willingness To Pay," 2002 Annual meeting, July 28-31, Long Beach, CA 19710, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
    15. Foltz, Jeremy D. & Kim, Kwansoo & Barham, Bradford L., 2001. "A Dynamic Count Data Analysis of University Ag-Biotech Patents," Research Reports 25230, University of Connecticut, Food Marketing Policy Center.
    16. GianCarlo Moschini, 2008. "Biotechnology and the development of food markets: retrospect and prospects," European Review of Agricultural Economics, Foundation for the European Review of Agricultural Economics, vol. 35(3), pages 331-355, September.
    17. Johnson, D. Demcey & Lin, William & Vocke, Gary, 2005. "Economic and welfare impacts of commercializing a herbicide-tolerant, biotech wheat," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 30(2), pages 162-184, April.
    18. Falck-Zepeda, Jose & Horna, Daniela & Smale, Melinda, 2007. "The economic impact and the distribution of benefits and risk from the adoption of insect resistant (Bt) cotton in West Africa," IFPRI discussion papers 718, International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI).
    19. Demont, Matty & Tollens, Eric, 1999. "The Economics Of Agricultural Biotechnology: Historical And Analytical Framework," Working Papers 31845, Katholieke Universiteit Leuven, Centre for Agricultural and Food Economics.
    20. Matthew S. Clancy & GianCarlo Moschini, 2017. "Intellectual Property Rights and the Ascent of Proprietary Innovation in Agriculture," Annual Review of Resource Economics, Annual Reviews, vol. 9(1), pages 53-74, October.

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • L1 - Industrial Organization - - Market Structure, Firm Strategy, and Market Performance
    • L4 - Industrial Organization - - Antitrust Issues and Policies
    • O3 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights
    • Q1 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Agriculture

    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:isu:genstf:201001010800001117. 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: Curtis Balmer (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/deiasus.html .

    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.