IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/isu/genstf/201601010800001066.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Intellectual property in plant breeding: comparing different levels and forms of protection

Author

Listed:
  • Lence, Sergio H
  • Hayes, Dermot J.
  • Alston, Julian M.
  • Smith, John Stephen C.

Abstract

Welfare trade-offs between intellectual property (IP) protections provided by patents and by plant variety protection (PVP) are explored. PVP breeders’ exemption weakens IP protection, but may speed the transfer of research gains across firms. A model is developed assuming firms optimise research given existing IP protection. A baseline scenario supporting each system is used to perform welfare analysis, and study how the balance is altered between systems. Survey data suggest patents are more appropriate for longer-term, higher-risk research, whereas PVP is better suited for traditional breeding. A scenario where patents and licensing co-exist dominates PVP in all commercially relevant areas.

Suggested Citation

  • Lence, Sergio H & Hayes, Dermot J. & Alston, Julian M. & Smith, John Stephen C., 2016. "Intellectual property in plant breeding: comparing different levels and forms of protection," ISU General Staff Papers 201601010800001066, Iowa State University, Department of Economics.
  • Handle: RePEc:isu:genstf:201601010800001066
    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. 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.
    2. Robert E. Evenson, 1989. "Spillover Benefits of Agricultural Research: Evidence from U.S. Experience," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 71(2), pages 447-452.
    3. Deepthi Elizabeth Kolady & David J. Spielman & Anthony Cavalieri, 2012. "The Impact of Seed Policy Reforms and Intellectual Property Rights on Crop Productivity in India," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 63(2), pages 361-384, June.
    4. Bonwoo Koo & Brian D. Wright, 2010. "Dynamic Effects of Patent Policy on Sequential Innovation," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 19(2), pages 489-512, June.
    5. 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, February.
    6. Lence, Sergio H. & Hayes, Dermot J., 2005. "Technology Fees Versus Gurts in the Presence of Spillovers: World Welfare Impacts," Staff General Research Papers Archive 12417, Iowa State University, Department of Economics.
    7. Day-Rubenstein, Kelly A. & Heisey, Paul W. & Shoemaker, Robbin A. & Sullivan, John & Frisvold, George B., 2005. "Crop Genetic Resources: An Economic Appraisal," Economic Information Bulletin 59388, United States Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service.
    8. Hayes, Dermot J. & Lence, Sergio H. & Goggi, Susana, 2010. "Impact of Intellectual Property Rights in the Seed Sector on Crop Yield Growth and Social Welfare: A Case Study Approach," Staff General Research Papers Archive 31484, Iowa State University, Department of Economics.
    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. 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. Adrien Hervouet & Stéphane Lemarié, 2023. "The Economics of Royalty Rates in Plant Breeding," Working Papers 2023-03, Grenoble Applied Economics Laboratory (GAEL).
    3. Minyu Zhou & Ian Sheldon & Jihyun Eum, 2018. "The role of intellectual property rights in seed technology transfer through trade: evidence from U.S. field crop seed exports," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 49(4), pages 423-434, July.
    4. Ryota Nakatani, 2024. "Food companies' productivity dynamics: Exploring the role of intangible assets," Agribusiness, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 40(1), pages 185-226, January.
    5. Claire H Luby & Julie C Dawson & Irwin L Goldman, 2016. "Assessment and Accessibility of Phenotypic and Genotypic Diversity of Carrot (Daucus carota L. var. sativus) Cultivars Commercially Available in the United States," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 11(12), pages 1-19, December.

    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. Wenjuan Cheng & Alessio D’Amato & Giacomo Pallante, 2020. "Benefit sharing mechanisms for agricultural genetic diversity use and on-farm conservation," Economia Politica: Journal of Analytical and Institutional Economics, Springer;Fondazione Edison, vol. 37(1), pages 337-355, April.
    2. 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).
    3. Spielman, David J. & Ma, Xingliang, 2014. "Intellectual property rights, technology diffusion, and agricultural development: Cross-country evidence:," IFPRI discussion papers 1345, International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI).
    4. Ciarli, Tommaso & Ràfols, Ismael, 2019. "The relation between research priorities and societal demands: The case of rice," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(4), pages 949-967.
    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. Huffman, Wallace E., 1996. "Farm Labor: Key Conceptual and Measurement Issues on the Route to Better Farm Cost and Return Estimates," ISU General Staff Papers 199604010800001279, Iowa State University, Department of Economics.
    7. Varshney, Deepak & Joshi, P. K. & Kumar, A. & Mishra, A. K. & Dubey, S. K., 2022. "Examining the transfer of knowledge and training to smallholders in India: direct and spillover effects of agricultural advisory services in an emerging economy," Papers published in Journals (Open Access), International Water Management Institute, pages 160:106067..
    8. Mercedes Campi & Alessandro Nuvolari, 2021. "Intellectual Property Rights and Agricultural Development: Evidence from a Worldwide Index of IPRs in Agriculture (1961-2018)," Journal of Development Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 57(4), pages 650-668, April.
    9. My wish K. Maredia & Richard Ward & Derek Byerlee, 1996. "Econometric estimation of a global spillover matrix for wheat varietal technology," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 14(3), pages 159-173, August.
    10. Gotor, Elisabetta & Caracciolo, Francesco & Watts, Jamie, 2010. "The Perceived Impact of the In-Trust Agreements on CGIAR Germplasm Availability: An Assessment of Bioversity International's Institutional Activities," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 38(10), pages 1486-1493, October.
    11. Yucan Liu & C. Richard Shumway & Robert Rosenman & Virgil Eldon Ball, 2011. "Productivity growth and convergence in US agriculture: new cointegration panel data results," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 43(1), pages 91-102.
    12. Zaby, Alexandra, 2020. "Safe harbors for patent infringers: sequential innovation under incomplete patent protection," VfS Annual Conference 2020 (Virtual Conference): Gender Economics 224653, Verein für Socialpolitik / German Economic Association.
    13. Moschini, GianCarlo, 2010. "Competition Issues in the Seed Industry and the Role of Intellectual Property," Choices: The Magazine of Food, Farm, and Resource Issues, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 25(2), pages 1-14.
    14. Liangzhi You & Michael Johnson, 2010. "Exploring strategic priorities for regional agricultural R&D investments in East and Central Africa," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 41(2), pages 177-190, March.
    15. Alejandro Plastina & Lilyan Fulginiti, 2012. "Rates of return to public agricultural research in 48 US states," Journal of Productivity Analysis, Springer, vol. 37(2), pages 95-113, April.
    16. Pardey, Philip G. & Koo, Bonwoo & Drew, Jennifer & Nottenburg, Carol, 2012. "The Evolving Landscape of IP Rights for Plant Varieties in the United States, 1930-2008," Staff Papers 119346, University of Minnesota, Department of Applied Economics.
    17. Githiomi, Caroline & Muriithi, Beatrice & Irungu, Patrick & Mwungu, Chris M. & Diiro, Gracious & Affognon, Hippolyte & Mburu, John & Ekesi, Sunday, 2019. "Economic analysis of spillover effects of an integrated pest management (IPM) strategy for suppression of mango fruit fly in Kenya," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 84(C), pages 121-132.
    18. Brüggemann, Julia & Crosetto, Paolo & Meub, Lukas & Bizer, Kilian, 2016. "Intellectual property rights hinder sequential innovation. Experimental evidence," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(10), pages 2054-2068.
    19. Nolan, Elizabeth & Santos, Paulo, 2010. "Measuring the Contribution of Genetic Characteristics as an Indicator of Innovation: The Case of Corn in the USA, 1990-2009," 2010 Annual Meeting, July 25-27, 2010, Denver, Colorado 61333, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    20. 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.

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • O31 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights - - - Innovation and Invention: Processes and Incentives
    • O34 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights - - - Intellectual Property and Intellectual Capital
    • Q16 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Agriculture - - - R&D; Agricultural Technology; Biofuels; Agricultural Extension Services

    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:201601010800001066. 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.