Papers by Viktoriya Galushko
2 | P a g e
Bookmarks Related papers MentionsView impact
Technological change in the early 1980s inspired major changes in intellectual property protectio... more Technological change in the early 1980s inspired major changes in intellectual property protection for Canadian agriculture. By allowing the patenting of single-celled organisms and within-cell events, in 1982 the Canadian Intellectual Property Office opened a window for biotech industry and spurred private sector investment. Increasing private sector involvement in agricultural R&D was accompanied by greater application of intellectual property rights (IPRs) over germplasm, cultivars, gene sequences, markers, and other tools necessary for further research. Given the cumulative nature of agricultural research, there are growing
Bookmarks Related papers MentionsView impact
Canadian Journal of Agricultural Economics-revue Canadienne D Agroeconomie, 2020
Bookmarks Related papers MentionsView impact
Technological change in the early 1980s inspired major changes in intellectual property protectio... more Technological change in the early 1980s inspired major changes in intellectual property protection for Canadian agriculture. By allowing the patenting of single-celled organisms and within-cell events, in 1982 the Canadian Intellectual Property Office opened a window for biotech industry and spurred private sector investment. Increasing private sector involvement in agricultural R&D was accompanied by greater application of intellectual property rights (IPRs) over germplasm, cultivars, gene sequences, markers, and other tools necessary for further research. Given the cumulative nature of agricultural research, there are growing concerns that assignment of IPRs may restrict access to upstream innovations, thus altering, postponing, or abandoning current research initiatives. The objective of this study is to provide a quantitative assessment of the current IP protection system with regards to access to research tools/germplasm and dissemination of knowledge among scientists.
Bookmarks Related papers MentionsView impact
The development of intellectual property (IP) protection in plant breeding brought much needed pr... more The development of intellectual property (IP) protection in plant breeding brought much needed private investment into canola research in the 1980s, but at the same time, fragmented research and IP ownership. In the 1990s, the biotechnology industry tried to address the growing IP fragmentation through a series of mergers and acquisitions. As we show through a survey of canola breeders, these changes reduced the sharing of knowledge in both the public and private sector, significantly increasing the cost of conducting breeding research. In the past decade, firms have clearly moved away from mergers and acquisitions towards cross-licensing of IP. What remains to be seen, is whether these agreements get to the root of the freedom-to-operate (FTO) problem that exists in agricultural biotechnology.
Bookmarks Related papers MentionsView impact
The development of intellectual property (IP) protection in plant breeding brought much needed pr... more The development of intellectual property (IP) protection in plant breeding brought much needed private investment into canola research in the 1980s, but at the same time, fragmented research and IP ownership. In the 1990s, the biotechnology industry tried to addressed the growing IP fragmentation through a series of mergers and aquisitions. As we show through a survey of canola breeders, these changes reduced the sharing of knowledge in both the public and private sector, significantly increasing the cost of conducting breeding research. In the past decade, firms have clearly moved away from mergers and acquisitions and towards cross-licensing of IP. What remains to be seen, is whether these agreements get to the root of the freedom to operate (FTO) problem that exists in agricultural biotechnology.
Bookmarks Related papers MentionsView impact
Canadian Journal of Agricultural Economics/Revue canadienne d'agroeconomie
Although wheat is the largest field crop in Canada, the intellectual property rights for the self... more Although wheat is the largest field crop in Canada, the intellectual property rights for the self-pollinated, nongenetically modified crop have been too weak to allow significant royalty flow to plant breeders. The sector heavily relies on resource-constrained public breeding programs for new variety development. This long-standing situation could change with the 2015 Agricultural Growth Act, which strengthens Canadian plant breeders’ rights to be consistent with the UPOV 91 convention. We explore the potential implications for Canada by examining the experience with UPOV 91 implementation in the United Kingdom, France, and Australia. Using the royalty structures in these countries as potential pathways for Canada, an ex ante benefit–cost framework is used to illustrate the choice of pathway is important. Over a 40-year period, the Australian, French, and U.K. implementation pathways generate 4.8, 4.0, and 1.5 $CDN billion in net benefit (respectively) over the status quo. Over shorter time horizons of 20 and 30 years, France is quicker to establish uniform endpoint royalties that provide the highest net benefits. Proactive industry engagement to develop more robust royalty collection system is required to realize these potential benefits.
Bookmarks Related papers MentionsView impact
Agricultural and Food Economics, 2016
Bookmarks Related papers MentionsView impact
Bookmarks Related papers MentionsView impact
Bookmarks Related papers MentionsView impact
Bookmarks Related papers MentionsView impact
International Journal of Business Administration, 2014
Bookmarks Related papers MentionsView impact
Science and Public Policy, 2014
Bookmarks Related papers MentionsView impact
International Journal of Technology and Globalisation, 2012
ABSTRACT Through one-on-one in-depth interviews of Canadian public sector flax breeders, this stu... more ABSTRACT Through one-on-one in-depth interviews of Canadian public sector flax breeders, this study explores issues around Intellectual Property (IP) and Freedom To Operate (FTP) in flax breeding from a Canadian perspective. The results are supported by a scan of flax breeding efforts worldwide, an in-depth patent analysis (using Patent Lens and the US Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) databases) and a review of varietal registrations (via the International Union for Protection of New Varieties of Plants (UPOV) Variety Registration database) for country-by-country applications to national listings and Plant Breeders Rights (PBRs). The results suggest that while stronger Intellectual Property Rights (IPRs) seem to hamper research in some crops, flax breeding overall has not witnessed the negative effects of stronger IP protection. Relative to other crops, flax production worldwide is small. The flax breeding industry itself is represented primarily by public research institutions with only a few small private companies operating in this area worldwide. Given the significant involvement of the public sector and the limited use of biotechnology, the flax IP landscape is not as complex as that of other oil crops such as canola and soybeans.
Bookmarks Related papers MentionsView impact
Canadian Journal of Agricultural Economics/Revue canadienne d'agroeconomie, 2012
Bookmarks Related papers MentionsView impact
Agricultural Economics, 2012
Bookmarks Related papers MentionsView impact
Uploads
Papers by Viktoriya Galushko