IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ags/eaae02/24904.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

R&D Appropriability and Planned Obsolescence: Empirical Evidence from Wheat Breeding in the UK (1960-1995)

Author

Listed:
  • Rangnekar, Dwijen

Abstract

Plant breeders face a unique appropriation problem - plants are reproducible, genetic information is heritable and seeds can be multiplied. The paper uses indicators of varietal age as a proxy for durability to examine strategies of planned obsolescence. Using wheat breeding in the UK, evidence of strategies of planned obsolescence is confirmed. This is then corroborated with evidence of tendencies towards increased proliferation of varieties on the market and breeding strategies that focus on incremental productivity improvements (i.e. increased efficiency) and narrow and limited disease resistance (i.e. reduced durability).

Suggested Citation

  • Rangnekar, Dwijen, 2002. "R&D Appropriability and Planned Obsolescence: Empirical Evidence from Wheat Breeding in the UK (1960-1995)," 2002 International Congress, August 28-31, 2002, Zaragoza, Spain 24904, European Association of Agricultural Economists.
    • Handle: RePEc:ags:eaae02:24904
    DOI: 10.22004/ag.econ.24904
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/24904/files/cp02ra38.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.22004/ag.econ.24904?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
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Bulow, Jeremy I, 1982. "Durable-Goods Monopolists," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 90(2), pages 314-332, April.
    2. Zvi Griliches, 1998. "Patent Statistics as Economic Indicators: A Survey," NBER Chapters, in: R&D and Productivity: The Econometric Evidence, pages 287-343, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    3. Fishman, Arthur & Gandal, Neil & Shy, Oz, 1993. "Planned Obsolescence as an Engine of Technological Progress," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 41(4), pages 361-370, December.
    4. Godden, David P., 1982. "Plant Variety Rights in Australia: Some Economic Issues," Review of Marketing and Agricultural Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 50(01), pages 1-45, April.
    5. Giovanni Dosi, 2000. "Sources, Procedures, and Microeconomic Effects of Innovation," Chapters, in: Innovation, Organization and Economic Dynamics, chapter 2, pages 63-114, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    6. Dosi, Giovanni, 1993. "Technological paradigms and technological trajectories : A suggested interpretation of the determinants and directions of technical change," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 22(2), pages 102-103, April.
    7. Rosenberg,Nathan, 1994. "Exploring the Black Box," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521459556, September.
    8. repec:fth:harver:1473 is not listed on IDEAS
    9. Jeremy Bulow, 1986. "An Economic Theory of Planned Obsolescence," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 101(4), pages 729-749.
    10. Swan, Peter L, 1970. "Durability of Consumption Goods," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 60(5), pages 884-894, December.
    11. Rangnekar, Dwijen, 2000. "Plant breeding, biodiversity loss and intellectual property rights," Economics Discussion Papers 2000-5, School of Economics, Kingston University London.
    12. Coase, Ronald H, 1972. "Durability and Monopoly," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 15(1), pages 143-149, April.
    13. Avinger, Robert L, Jr, 1981. "Product Durability and Market Structure: Some Evidence," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 29(4), pages 357-374, June.
    14. Michael Waldman, 1993. "A New Perspective on Planned Obsolescence," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 108(1), pages 273-283.
    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. Varios autores, 2015. "Colección Enrique Low Murtra: Derecho económico. Tomo X," Books, Universidad Externado de Colombia, Facultad de Derecho, number 1018, htpr_v3_i.

    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. Galiani, Sebastian & Jaitman, Laura & Weinschelbaum, Federico, 2020. "Crime and durable goods," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 173(C), pages 146-163.
    2. Rangnekar, Dwijen, 2000. "Plant breeding, biodiversity loss and intellectual property rights," Economics Discussion Papers 2000-5, School of Economics, Kingston University London.
    3. Roland Strausz, 2009. "Planned Obsolescence as an Incentive Device for Unobservable Quality," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 119(540), pages 1405-1421, October.
    4. Eric Brouillat, 2015. "Live fast, die young? Investigating product life spans and obsolescence in an agent-based model," Journal of Evolutionary Economics, Springer, vol. 25(2), pages 447-473, April.
    5. Eric Brouillat, 2011. "Durability of consumption goods and market competition: an agent-based modelling," Post-Print hal-00780254, HAL.
    6. Fethke, Gary & Jagannathan, Raj, 2000. "Why would a durable good monopolist also produce a cost-inefficient nondurable good?," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 18(5), pages 793-812, July.
    7. Judith Chevalier & Austan Goolsbee, 2009. "Are Durable Goods Consumers Forward-Looking? Evidence from College Textbooks," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 124(4), pages 1853-1884.
    8. Pangburn, Michael S. & Stavrulaki, Euthemia, 2014. "Take back costs and product durability," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 238(1), pages 175-184.
    9. Michael Waldman, 2004. "Antitrust Perspectives for Durable-Goods Markets," CESifo Working Paper Series 1306, CESifo.
    10. Gerstle, Ari D. & Waldman, Michael, 2016. "Mergers in durable-goods industries: A re-examination of market power and welfare effects," Research in Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(4), pages 677-692.
    11. Goering, Gregory E., 2008. "Socially concerned firms and the provision of durable goods," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 25(3), pages 575-583, May.
    12. Gregory E. Goering, 2010. "Durability Choice And The Piracy For Profit Of Goods," Metroeconomica, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 61(2), pages 282-301, May.
    13. Adriano A. Rampini, 2019. "Financing Durable Assets," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 109(2), pages 664-701, February.
    14. Kuppelwieser, Volker G. & Klaus, Phil & Manthiou, Aikaterini & Boujena, Othman, 2019. "Consumer responses to planned obsolescence," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 47(C), pages 157-165.
    15. Gregory E. Goering, 2007. "Durable‐Goods Monopoly With Maintenance," Bulletin of Economic Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 59(3), pages 231-246, July.
    16. Giovanni Cespa, 2008. "Information Sales and Insider Trading with Long‐Lived Information," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 63(2), pages 639-672, April.
    17. Francesco Nava & Pasquale Schiraldi, 2019. "Differentiated Durable Goods Monopoly: A Robust Coase Conjecture," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 109(5), pages 1930-1968, May.
    18. Yan, Wei & Xiong, Yu & Chu, Junhong & Li, Gendao & Xiong, Zhongkai, 2018. "Clicks versus Bricks: The role of durability in marketing channel strategy of durable goods manufacturers," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 265(3), pages 909-918.
    19. Goering, Gregory E. & Sarangi, Sudipta, 2012. "Durable goods produced by state owned enterprises," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 29(3), pages 893-899.
    20. Justin P. Johnson & Michael Waldman, 2010. "Leasing, Lemons, and Moral Hazard," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 53(2), pages 307-328, May.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Crop Production/Industries;

    JEL classification:

    • L13 - Industrial Organization - - Market Structure, Firm Strategy, and Market Performance - - - Oligopoly and Other Imperfect Markets
    • O31 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights - - - Innovation and Invention: Processes and Incentives
    • Q10 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Agriculture - - - General

    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:ags:eaae02:24904. 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/eaaeeea.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.