IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ags/iaae97/197037.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Agricultural Biotechnology: Economic and International Implications

Author

Listed:
  • Zilberman, David
  • Yarkin, Cherisa
  • Heiman, Amir

Abstract

Over the last 150 years, agriculture has been subject to several waves of innovation which have significantly altered its institutional structures, its products and the way it is practised. Mechanical, biological and chemical innovations have, in turn, reduced labour requirements, increased yields and reduced the impact of agricultural pests. More recently, computer and remote sensing technologies have improved input precision. Agricultural biotechnology is now emerging as a wellspring of innovations that will reshape agriculture as profoundly as any previous innovation paradigm.' This new technology has unique features which economists need to understand in order to formulate appropriate policy advice. This paper has two main purposes. First, we provide an overview of agricultural biotechnology. There are lessons from medical biotechnology which can be applied to agriculture. In addition, there are new institutions, including technology transfer offices and arrangements for intellectual property rights, which will be introduced and discussed. The second purpose is to introduce some basic analytical considerations and methodological issues which will be important in the study of biotechnology. In particular, these methodologies will relate to the issues in industrial organization associated with the process of product research, development and introduction; issues associated with adoption of biotechnology; and issues associated with pricing. Thus far, commercial biotechnology has been concentrated in the United States, but this technology has important global implications. This paper will examine and project what the American experience implies for the rest of the world and show how biotechnology and its evolution fit within the context of the relationship between developed and developing nations.

Suggested Citation

  • Zilberman, David & Yarkin, Cherisa & Heiman, Amir, 1997. "Agricultural Biotechnology: Economic and International Implications," 1997 Conference, August 10-16, 1997, Sacramento, California 197037, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    • Handle: RePEc:ags:iaae97:197037
    DOI: 10.22004/ag.econ.197037
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/197037/files/agecon-023conf-1997-009_1_.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.22004/ag.econ.197037?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. David Zilberman, 1996. "The Economics of a Public Fund for Environmental Amenities: A Study of CRP Contracts," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 78(4), pages 961-971.
    2. Avinash K. Dixit & Robert S. Pindyck, 1994. "Investment under Uncertainty," Economics Books, Princeton University Press, edition 1, number 5474.
    3. DOUGLAS D. Parker & DAVID Zilberman, 1993. "University Technology Transfers: Impacts On Local And U.S. Economies," Contemporary Economic Policy, Western Economic Association International, vol. 11(2), pages 87-99, April.
    4. Richard E. Just & Darrell L. Hueth, 1993. "Multimarket Exploitation: The Case of Biotechnology and Chemicals," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 75(4), pages 936-945.
    5. Babcock, Bruce A. & Lakshminarayan, P. G. & Wu, JunJie & Zilberman, David, 1996. "Economics of a Public Fund for Environmental Amenities (The)," Staff General Research Papers Archive 1065, 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. Bradford Barham & Jeremy Foltz & Kwansoo Kim, 2002. "Trends in University Ag-Biotech Patent Production," Review of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 24(2), pages 294-308.
    2. Demont, Matty & Tollens, Eric, 1999. "The Economics Of Agricultural Biotechnology: Historical And Analytical Framework," Working Papers 31845, Katholieke Universiteit Leuven, Centre for Agricultural and Food Economics.
    3. Jeremy Foltz & Bradford Barham & Kwansoo Kim, 2000. "Universities and agricultural biotechnology patent production," Agribusiness, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 16(1), pages 82-95.
    4. Xia, Yin & Buccola, Steven T., 2001. "Are Basic Science And Biotechnology Complementary Activities?," 2001 Annual meeting, August 5-8, Chicago, IL 20575, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
    5. Jeremy D. Foltz & Kwansoo Kim & Bradford L. Barham, 2001. "A Dynamic Count Data Analysis of University Ag-Biotech Patents," Food Marketing Policy Center Research Reports 056, University of Connecticut, Department of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Charles J. Zwick Center for Food and Resource Policy.
    6. Goodhue, Rachael E. & Rausser, Gordon C., 2003. "Value Differentiation," Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Western Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 28(3), pages 1-21, December.
    7. Franks, Jeremy R., 1999. "The status and prospects for genetically modified crops in Europe," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 24(5), pages 565-584, October.
    8. Stone, Susan F. & Matysek, Anna & Dolling, Andrew, 2002. "Modelling Possible Impacts of GM Crops on Australian Trade," Staff Research Papers 31913, Productivity Commission.
    9. Jackson, Lee Ann, 2000. "Agricultural Biotechnology And The Privatization Of Genetic Information: Implications For Innovation And Equity," Working Papers 14365, University of Minnesota, Center for International Food and Agricultural Policy.

    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. Yang, Wanhong & Isik, Murat, 2003. "Integrating Farmer Decision-Making to Target Land Retirement Programs," 2003 Annual meeting, July 27-30, Montreal, Canada 22062, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
    2. Hongli Feng & Catherine L. Kling & Lyubov A. Kurkalova & Silvia Secchi & Philip W. Gassman, 2005. "The Conservation Reserve Program in the Presence of a Working Land Alternative: Implications for Environmental Quality, Program Participation, and Income Transfer," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 87(5), pages 1231-1238.
    3. Wu, JunJie & Zilberman, David & Babcock, Bruce A., 2001. "Environmental and Distributional Impacts of Conservation Targeting Strategies," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 41(3), pages 333-350, May.
    4. Soh, Moonwon & Cho, Seong-Hoon & Yu, Edward & Boyer, Christopher & English, Burton, 2018. "Targeting Payments for Ecosystem Services Given Ecological and Economic Objectives," 2018 Annual Meeting, February 2-6, 2018, Jacksonville, Florida 266502, Southern Agricultural Economics Association.
    5. Yang, Wanhong & Khanna, Madhu & Farnsworth, Richard & Onal, Hayri, 2003. "Integrating economic, environmental and GIS modeling to target cost effective land retirement in multiple watersheds," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 46(2), pages 249-267, September.
    6. Jens Leth Hougaard & Kurt Nielsen & Athanasios Papakonstantinou, 2012. "A Simple Multi-attribute Yardstick Auction Without Prior Scoring," MSAP Working Paper Series 02_2012, University of Copenhagen, Department of Food and Resource Economics.
    7. Cho, Seong-Hoon & Soh, Moonwon & English, Burton C. & Yu, T. Edward & Boyer, Christopher N., 2019. "Targeting payments for forest carbon sequestration given ecological and economic objectives," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 100(C), pages 214-226.
    8. Wanhong Yang & Madhu Khanna & Richard Farnsworth & Hayri Önal, 2005. "Is Geographical Targeting Cost-Effective? The Case of the Conservation Reserve Enhancement Program in Illinois," Review of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 27(1), pages 70-88.
    9. Phillip Hone & Geoff Edwards & lain Fraser, 1999. "Agricultural Land Retirement and Biodiversity Policy," Agenda - A Journal of Policy Analysis and Reform, Australian National University, College of Business and Economics, School of Economics, vol. 6(3), pages 211-224.
    10. Whitten, Stuart M., 2017. "Designing and implementing conservation tender metrics: Twelve core considerations," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 63(C), pages 561-571.
    11. Markus Groth, 2009. "The transferability and performance of payment-by-results biodiversity conservation procurement auctions: empirical evidence from northernmost Germany," Working Paper Series in Economics 119, University of Lüneburg, Institute of Economics.
    12. Banerjee, Simanti & Conte, Marc N., 2017. "Balancing Complexity and Rent-Seeking in Multi-Attribute Conservation Procurement Auctions: Evidence from a Laboratory Experiment," 2018 Allied Social Sciences Association (ASSA) Annual Meeting, January 5-7, 2018, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 266293, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    13. Werner Hediger, 2003. "Alternative policy measures and farmers' participation to improve rural landscapes and water quality: A conceptual framework," Swiss Journal of Economics and Statistics (SJES), Swiss Society of Economics and Statistics (SSES), vol. 139(III), pages 333-350, September.
    14. Jacobs, Keri L. & Thurman, Walter N. & Marra, Michele C., 2011. "How Farmers Bid Into the Conservation Reserve Program: An Empirical Analysis of CRP Offers Data," 2011 Annual Meeting, July 24-26, 2011, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 103675, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    15. Khanna, Madhu & Isik, Murat & Zilberman, David, 2002. "Cost-effectiveness of alternative green payment policies for conservation technology adoption with heterogeneous land quality," Agricultural Economics, Blackwell, vol. 27(2), pages 157-174, August.
    16. Cattaneo, Andrea & Bucholtz, Shawn & Dewbre, Joe & Nickerson, Cynthia J., 2002. "The Crp Balancing Act: Trading Off Costs And Multiple Environmental Benefits," 2002 Annual meeting, July 28-31, Long Beach, CA 19810, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
    17. Wright, Andrew P. & Hudson, Darren, 2013. "Applying a Voluntary Incentive Mechanism to the Problem of Groundwater Conservation: An Experimental Approach," 2013 Annual Meeting, February 2-5, 2013, Orlando, Florida 143030, Southern Agricultural Economics Association.
    18. Jens Leth Hougaard & Kurt Nielsen & Athanasios Papakonstantinou, 2013. "A Multi-attribute Yardstick Auction without Prior Scoring," MSAP Working Paper Series 02_2013, University of Copenhagen, Department of Food and Resource Economics, revised Mar 2014.
    19. Guilherme S. Bastos & Erik Lichtenberg, 2001. "Priorities in Cost Sharing for Soil and Water Conservation: A Revealed Preference Study," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 77(4), pages 533-547.
    20. Cho, Wonjoo & Blandford, David, 2015. "Bilateral information asymmetry and irreversible practice adoption through agri-environmental policy: an application to peat land retirement in Norway," 89th Annual Conference, April 13-15, 2015, Warwick University, Coventry, UK 204212, Agricultural Economics Society.

    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:iaae97:197037. 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/iaaeeea.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.