IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ags/aaea06/21434.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Intellectual Property Rights, Genetic Use Restriction Technologies (GURTs), and Strategic Behavior

Author

Listed:
  • Shi, Guanming

Abstract

This article discusses the mutual reinforcement effects of IPRs and biotechnology in recent years, and review the development of GURTs and how the major agricultural biotechnology companies behave in that regard. Both proponents and opponents of GURTs made strong arguments based on speculations. We discuss the major arguments by both sides, and argue the possible strategic use of bundling and licensing strategy by the biotech giants, because GURTs make it possible for a seed to be marketed as a vector of trait options. We also examine the validity of two major implicit assumptions held by those opposing GURTs: patenting does not affect the monopoly power of GURTs; and GURTs would take over the GM seed market.

Suggested Citation

  • Shi, Guanming, 2006. "Intellectual Property Rights, Genetic Use Restriction Technologies (GURTs), and Strategic Behavior," 2006 Annual meeting, July 23-26, Long Beach, CA 21434, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
    • Handle: RePEc:ags:aaea06:21434
    DOI: 10.22004/ag.econ.21434
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/21434/files/sp06sh04.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.22004/ag.econ.21434?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. William James Adams & Janet L. Yellen, 1976. "Commodity Bundling and the Burden of Monopoly," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 90(3), pages 475-498.
    2. Barry Nalebuff, 2004. "Bundling as an Entry Barrier," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 119(1), pages 159-187.
    3. Shoemaker, Robbin A. & Harwood, Joy L. & Day-Rubenstein, Kelly A. & Dunahay, Terry & Heisey, Paul W. & Hoffman, Linwood A. & Klotz-Ingram, Cassandra & Lin, William W. & Mitchell, Lorraine & McBride, W, 2001. "Economic Issues In Agricultural Biotechnology," Agricultural Information Bulletins 33735, United States Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service.
    4. Kalaitzandonakes, Nicholas G., 1999. "A Farm Level Perspective On Agrobiotechnology," Agricultural Outlook Forum 1999 32913, United States Department of Agriculture, Agricultural Outlook Forum.
    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. Tarek Abdallah, 2019. "On the Benefit (Or Cost) of Large‐Scale Bundling," Production and Operations Management, Production and Operations Management Society, vol. 28(4), pages 955-969, April.
    2. Shi, Guanming & Chavas, Jean-Paul & Stiegert, Kyle W., 2008. "An Analysis of Bundle Pricing: The Case of the Corn Seed Market," Staff Papers 92212, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Department of Agricultural and Applied Economics.
    3. Yong Chao & Timothy Derdenger, 2013. "Mixed Bundling in Two-Sided Markets in the Presence of Installed Base Effects," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 59(8), pages 1904-1926, August.
    4. Jihui Chen & Qiang Fu, 2017. "Do exclusivity arrangements harm consumers?," Journal of Regulatory Economics, Springer, vol. 51(3), pages 311-339, June.
    5. Mark Armstrong & John Vickers, 2010. "Competitive Non-linear Pricing and Bundling," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 77(1), pages 30-60.
    6. Dennis W. Carlton & Michael Waldman, 2005. "Tying, Upgrades, and Switching Costs in Durable-Goods Markets," NBER Working Papers 11407, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    7. Chien-Yu Lai & Andreas Lange & John A. List & Michael K. Price, 2017. "The Business of Business is Business: Why (Some) Firms Should Provide Public Goods when they Sell Private Goods," NBER Working Papers 23105, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    8. Stole, Lars A., 2007. "Price Discrimination and Competition," Handbook of Industrial Organization, in: Mark Armstrong & Robert Porter (ed.), Handbook of Industrial Organization, edition 1, volume 3, chapter 34, pages 2221-2299, Elsevier.
    9. Alexei Alexandrov & Özlem Bedre-Defolie, 2014. "The Equivalence of Bundling and Advance Sales," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 33(2), pages 259-272, March.
    10. Thibaud Vergé, 2003. "Portfolio Effects and Merger Control: Full-line Forcing as an Entry Deterrence Strategy," Industrial Organization 0301010, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    11. Arribas, I. & Urbano, A., 2017. "Multiproduct trading with a common agent under complete information: Existence and characterization of Nash equilibrium," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 167(C), pages 14-38.
    12. Zhou, Jidong, 2021. "Mixed bundling in oligopoly markets," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 194(C).
    13. Waterman, David & Sherman, Ryland & Wook Ji, Sung, 2013. "The economics of online television: Industry development, aggregation, and “TV Everywhere”," Telecommunications Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(9), pages 725-736.
    14. Kuroda, Toshifumi & Ida, Takanori & Koguchi, Teppei, 2015. "The impact of asymmetric regulation on product bundling: The case of fixed broadband and mobile communications in Japan," 2015 Regional ITS Conference, Los Angeles 2015 146318, International Telecommunications Society (ITS).
    15. Page, Kenneth & Pérez, Juan & Telha, Claudio & García-Echalar, Andrés & López-Ospina, Héctor, 2021. "Optimal bundle composition in competition for continuous attributes," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 293(3), pages 1168-1187.
    16. Cooper, James C. & Froeb, Luke M. & O'Brien, Dan & Vita, Michael G., 2005. "Vertical antitrust policy as a problem of inference," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 23(7-8), pages 639-664, September.
    17. Chun‐Hui Miao, 2010. "Tying, Compatibility And Planned Obsolescence," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 58(3), pages 579-606, September.
    18. Victor Ginsburgh & Israel Zang, 2007. "Bundling by Competitors and the Sharing of Profits," Economics Bulletin, AccessEcon, vol. 12(16), pages 1-9.
    19. Dennis W. Carlton & Michael Waldman, 2014. "Robert Bork's Contributions to Antitrust Perspectives on Tying Behavior," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 57(S3), pages 121-144.
    20. Hinloopen, Jeroen & Müller, Wieland & Normann, Hans-Theo, 2014. "Output commitment through product bundling: Experimental evidence," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 65(C), pages 164-180.

    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:ags:aaea06:21434. 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: AgEcon Search (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/aaeaaea.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.