Nothing Special   »   [go: up one dir, main page]
IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/fpr/eptddp/70.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

South-North trade, intellectual property jurisdictions, and freedom to operate in agricultural research on staple crops:

Author

Listed:
  • Binenbaum, Eran
  • Pardey, Philip G.
  • Zambrano, Patricia
  • Nottenburg, Carol
  • Wright, Brian D.
Abstract
A biotechnology revolution is proceeding in tandem with international proliferation of intellectual property regimes and rights. Does the intellectual property impede agricultural research conducted in, or of consequence for, developing countries? This question has important spatial dimensions that link the location of production, the pattern of international trade, and the jurisdiction of intellectual property. Our main conclusion is that the current concerns about the freedom to operate in agricultural research oriented towards food crops for the developing world are exaggerated. Rights to intellectual property are confined to the jurisdictions where they are granted, and, presently, many of the intellectual property (IP) rights for biotechnologies potentially useful to developing-country agricultural producers are valid only in developed countries. IP problems might arise in technologies destined for crops grown in developing countries unencumbered by IP restrictions, if those crops are subsequently exported to countries in which IP is likely to prevail. Thus freedom to trade is also part of the IP story. However, using international production and trade data in the 15 crops critical to food security throughout the developing world, we show that exports from developing to developed countries are generally dwarfed by production and consumption in the developing world, the value of these exports is concentrated in a few crops and a few exporting countries, and the bulk of these exports go to Western Europe. Thus for now, most LDC researchers can focus primarily on domestic IPR in determining their freedom to operate with respect to food staples.

Suggested Citation

  • Binenbaum, Eran & Pardey, Philip G. & Zambrano, Patricia & Nottenburg, Carol & Wright, Brian D., 2000. "South-North trade, intellectual property jurisdictions, and freedom to operate in agricultural research on staple crops:," EPTD discussion papers 70, International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI).
    • Handle: RePEc:fpr:eptddp:70
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.ifpri.org/sites/default/files/publications/eptdp70.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. 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.
    2. Stanley M. Besen & Leo J. Raskind, 1991. "An Introduction to the Law and Economics of Intellectual Property," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 5(1), pages 3-27, Winter.
    3. John H. Barton & Joseph Strauss, 2000. "How can the developing world protect itself from biotech patent-holders?," Nature, Nature, vol. 406(6795), pages 455-455, August.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Ozgur Aydogmus & Erkan Gürpinar, 2022. "Science, Technology and Institutional Change in Knowledge Production: An Evolutionary Game Theoretic Framework," Dynamic Games and Applications, Springer, vol. 12(4), pages 1163-1188, December.
    2. Alessandro Marra & Alessandro Sarra, 2010. "Incomplete antitrust laws and private actions for damages," European Journal of Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 30(2), pages 111-135, October.
    3. Lesser, William H., 2000. "An Economic Approach To Identifying An 'Effective Sui Generis System' For Plant Variety Protection Unders Trips," Transitions in Agbiotech: Economics of Strategy and Policy, June 24-25, 1999, Washington, D.C. 25996, Regional Research Project NE-165 Private Strategies, Public Policies, and Food System Performance.
    4. Kim, Jongwook & Mahoney, Joseph T., 2008. "A Strategic Theory of the Firm as a Nexus of Incomplete Contracts: A Property Rights Approach," Working Papers 08-0108, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, College of Business.
    5. Andrés, Antonio R. & Goel, Rajeev K., 2012. "Does software piracy affect economic growth? Evidence across countries," Journal of Policy Modeling, Elsevier, vol. 34(2), pages 284-295.
    6. Massimiliano Granieri, 2011. "A Law and Economics Introduction to Patent Law and Procedure," Chapters, in: Federico Munari & Raffaele Oriani (ed.), The Economic Valuation of Patents, chapter 2, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    7. Po-Hsuan Hsu & Dongmei Li & Qin Li & Siew Hong Teoh & Kevin Tseng, 2022. "Valuation of New Trademarks," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 68(1), pages 257-279, January.
    8. 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.
    9. 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.
    10. Gil Ricard, 2006. "The Economics of IPR Protection Policies," Review of Network Economics, De Gruyter, vol. 5(3), pages 1-21, September.
    11. Marini, Marco A., 2006. "The value of a new idea: knowledge transmission, workers’ mobility and market structure," Chaos, Solitons & Fractals, Elsevier, vol. 29(3), pages 697-706.
    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. Pardey, Philip G. & Alston, Julian M. & Ruttan, Vernon W., 2010. "The Economics of Innovation and Technical Change in Agriculture," Handbook of the Economics of Innovation, in: Bronwyn H. Hall & Nathan Rosenberg (ed.), Handbook of the Economics of Innovation, edition 1, volume 2, chapter 0, pages 939-984, Elsevier.
    14. Crass, Dirk & Schwiebacher, Franz, 2013. "Do trademarks diminish the substitutability of products in innovative knowledge-intensive services?," ZEW Discussion Papers 13-061, ZEW - Leibniz Centre for European Economic Research.
    15. David Moroz, 2005. "Production of Scientific Knowledge and Radical Uncertainty: The Limits of the Normative Approach in Innovation Economics," European Journal of Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 20(3), pages 305-322, November.
    16. 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.
    17. Aydogmus, Ozgur, 2022. "Increasing returns and path dependence in knowledge creation and their effects on the dynamics of patent pools," Structural Change and Economic Dynamics, Elsevier, vol. 62(C), pages 467-477.
    18. Rajeev K. Goel, 2020. "IPR infringement in the United States: impacts on the input and output of R&D," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 45(2), pages 481-493, April.
    19. Alston, Julian M. & Wyatt, T. J. & Pardey, Philip G. & Marra, Michele C. & Chan-Kang, Connie, 2000. "A meta-analysis of rates of return to agricultural R & D: ex pede Herculem?," Research reports 113, International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI).
    20. Alessandro Stanziani, 2004. "Wine Reputation and Quality Controls: The Origin of the AOCs in 19th Century France," European Journal of Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 18(2), pages 149-167, September.

    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:fpr:eptddp:70. 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: the person in charge (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/ifprius.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.