IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ags/ucbecw/198653.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Bioprospecting with Prior Ecological Information

Author

Listed:
  • Rausser, Gordon
  • Small, Arthur

Abstract

Bioprospecting has been touted as a source of finance for biodiversity conservation. Recent work has suggested that the bioprospecting value of the "marginal unit" of genetic resources is likely to be vanishingly small, creating essentially no conservation incentive. This result is shown to flow specifically from a stylized description of the research process as one of brute-force testing, unaided by an organizing scientific framework. Scientific models channel research effort towards leads for which the expected productivity of discoveries is highest. Leads of unusual promise then command information rents, associated with their role in reducing the costs of search. When genetic materials are abundant, information rents are virtually unaffected by increases in the profitability of product discovery, and decline as technology improvements lower search costs. Numerical simulation results suggest that, under plausible conditions, the bioprospecting value of certain genetic resources could be large enough to support market-based conservation of biodiversity.
(This abstract was borrowed from another version of this item.)

Suggested Citation

  • Rausser, Gordon & Small, Arthur, 1997. "Bioprospecting with Prior Ecological Information," CUDARE Working Papers 198653, University of California, Berkeley, Department of Agricultural and Resource Economics.
    • Handle: RePEc:ags:ucbecw:198653
    DOI: 10.22004/ag.econ.198653
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/198653/files/agecon-cal-819.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.22004/ag.econ.198653?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. Weitzman, Martin L, 1979. "Optimal Search for the Best Alternative," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 47(3), pages 641-654, May.
    2. Brown, Gardner Jr. & Goldstein, Jon H., 1984. "A model for valuing endangered species," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 11(4), pages 303-309, December.
    3. Jon M. Conrad, 1980. "Quasi-Option Value and the Expected Value of Information," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 94(4), pages 813-820.
    4. Simpson, R David & Sedjo, Roger A & Reid, John W, 1996. "Valuing Biodiversity for Use in Pharmaceutical Research," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 104(1), pages 163-185, February.
    5. Edward Barbier & Bruce Aylward, 1996. "Capturing the pharmaceutical value of biodiversity in a developing country," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 8(2), pages 157-181, September.
    6. Polasky Stephen & Solow Andrew R., 1995. "On the Value of a Collection of Species," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 29(3), pages 298-303, November.
    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. Gardner M. Brown & Jason F. Shogren, 1998. "Economics of the Endangered Species Act," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 12(3), pages 3-20, Summer.
    2. Gollin, Douglas & Smale, Melinda & Skovmand, Bent, 1998. "Optimal Search in Ex situ Collections of Wheat Genetic Resources," Economics Working Papers 7695, CIMMYT: International Maize and Wheat Improvement Center.

    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. Rausser, Gordon C. & Small, Arthur A., 2000. "Valuing Research Leads: Bioprospecting and the Conservation of Genetic Resources," Department of Agricultural & Resource Economics, UC Berkeley, Working Paper Series qt4t56m5b8, Department of Agricultural & Resource Economics, UC Berkeley.
    2. Gordon C. Rausser & Arthur A. Small, 2000. "Valuing Research Leads: Bioprospecting and the Conservation of Genetic Resources," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 108(1), pages 173-206, February.
    3. Amy Craft & R. Simpson, 2001. "The Value of Biodiversity in Pharmaceutical Research with Differentiated Products," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 18(1), pages 1-17, January.
    4. Costello, Christopher & Ward, Michael, 2006. "Search, bioprospecting and biodiversity conservation," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 52(3), pages 615-626, November.
    5. Simpson, R. David & Craft, Amy, 1996. "The Social Value of Using Biodiversity in New Pharmaceutical Product Research," RFF Working Paper Series dp-96-33, Resources for the Future.
    6. Lynn Mainwaring, 2001. "Biodiversity, Biocomplexity, and the Economics of Genetic Dissimilarity," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 77(1), pages 79-83.
    7. Gnanaraj Chellaraj & Ramesh Govindaraj, 2002. "The Indian Pharmaceutical Sector : Issues and Options for Health Sector Reform," World Bank Publications - Books, The World Bank Group, number 15231.
    8. George B. Frisvold & Steven M. Moss & Andrea Hodgson & Mary E. Maxon, 2021. "Understanding the U.S. Bioeconomy: A New Definition and Landscape," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(4), pages 1-24, February.
    9. Folmer, Henk & van Kooten, G. Cornelis, 2006. "Deforestation," Working Papers 37035, University of Victoria, Resource Economics and Policy.
      • Henk Folmer & G. Cornelis van Kooten, 2006. "Deforestation," Working Papers 2006-06, University of Victoria, Department of Economics, Resource Economics and Policy Analysis Research Group.
    10. Swallow, Stephen K., 1996. "Economic Issues in Ecosystem Management: An Introduction and Overview," Agricultural and Resource Economics Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 25(2), pages 83-100, October.
    11. William A. Brock & Anastasios Xepapadeas, 2003. "Valuing Biodiversity from an Economic Perspective: A Unified Economic, Ecological, and Genetic Approach," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 93(5), pages 1597-1614, December.
    12. Marcoul, Philippe & Weninger, Quinn, 2008. "Search and active learning with correlated information: Empirical evidence from mid-Atlantic clam fishermen," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 32(6), pages 1921-1948, June.
    13. Baumgartner, Stefan & Becker, Christian & Faber, Malte & Manstetten, Reiner, 2006. "Relative and absolute scarcity of nature. Assessing the roles of economics and ecology for biodiversity conservation," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 59(4), pages 487-498, October.
    14. Andrew Metrick & Martin L. Weitzman, 1998. "Conflicts and Choices in Biodiversity Preservation," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 12(3), pages 21-34, Summer.
    15. Caracciolo, Francesco & Gotor, Elisabetta & Holloway, Garth J. & Watts, Jamie, 2008. "The Origin, Development And Structure Of Demand For Plant Genetic Resources. The Impact Of The In Trust Agreements To The CGIAR Collections Availability," 82nd Annual Conference, March 31 - April 2, 2008, Royal Agricultural College, Cirencester, UK 36773, Agricultural Economics Society.
    16. Sedjo, Roger & Simpson, R. David, 1996. "Valuation of Biodiversity for Use in New Product Research in a Model of Sequential Search," RFF Working Paper Series dp-96-27, Resources for the Future.
    17. Simpson, R. David & Sedjo, Roger A., 1996. "Valuation of Biodiversity for Use in New Product Research in a Model of Sequential Search," Discussion Papers 10618, Resources for the Future.
    18. Lanz, Bruno & Dietz, Simon & Swanson, Tim, 2018. "The Expansion of Modern Agriculture and Global Biodiversity Decline: An Integrated Assessment," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 144(C), pages 260-277.
    19. Artuso, Anthony, 2002. "Bioprospecting, Benefit Sharing, and Biotechnological Capacity Building," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 30(8), pages 1355-1368, August.
    20. Pagiola, Stefano & Zhang, Wei & Colom, Ale, 2009. "Can payments for watershed services help save biodiversity? A spatial analysis of highland Guatemala," MPRA Paper 13728, University Library of Munich, Germany.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Environmental Economics and Policy;

    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:ucbecw:198653. 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/dabrkus.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.