Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

Trade-Related Intellectual Property Rights, North-South Trade, and Biological Diversity

  • Published:
Environmental and Resource Economics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

In the Trade-Related Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS) Agreement of GATT (1 January 1995) it was agreed to harmonise intellectual property rights (IPR) on an international level and to include the option for patent protection for all life forms such as plants and animals (Article 27 (3) b). Patenting, however, leads to considerable conflicts between international trade and protection of biological diversity, which can be illustrated by the example of seed production. We make use of a three-stage game to show the strategic incentives for implementation of two different property rights regimes (patents and farmers' rights) on competition and biodiversity. We show that the Southern government has no incentive to acknowledge international patents, even if farmers' rights do exist. The Northern producer will always dominate in the output market if patents are applied, but without farmers' rights biodiversity will not be maintained by the Southern government. Thus total payoff of the northern firm is maximized, if both IPR regimes are implemented. However, if only farmers' rights are valid, biodiversity will be maximal.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

REFERENCES

  • Acharya, R. (1991), ‘Patenting of Biotechnology. GATT and the Erosion of theWorld's Biodiversity’, Journal of World Trade 25, 71–87.

    Google Scholar 

  • Barrett, S. (1994), ‘Strategic Environmental Policy and International Trade’, Journal of Public Economics 54, 325–338.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bhat, M. G. (1996), ‘Trade-Related Intellectual Property Rights to Biological Resources: Socioeconomic Implications for Developing Countries’, Ecological Economics 19, 205–217.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bhat, M. G. (1999), ‘On biodiversity Access, Intellectual Property Rights, and Conservation’, Ecological Economics 29, 391–403.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bragdon, S. H. and D. R. Downes (1998), Recent Policy Trends and Developments Related to Conservation, Use and Development of Genetic Resources, Issues in Genetic Resources No. 7. Rome: International Plant Genetic Resource Institute.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brander, J. A. and B. J. Spencer (1985), ‘Export Subsidies and International Market Share Rivalry’, Journal of International Economics 18, 83–100.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brush, S. (1992), ‘Farmers' Rights and Genetic Conservation in Traditional Farming Systems’, World Development 20, 1617–1630.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chin, J. C. and G. M. Grossman (1990), ‘Intellectual Property Rights and North-South Trade’, in Krueger, A. O. and R. W. Jones, eds., The Political Economy of International Trade. Essays in Honor of Robert Baldwin. Cambridge, pp. 90–108.

  • Deardorff, A. V. (1992), ‘Welfare Effects of Global Patent Protection’, Economica 59, 35–51.

    Google Scholar 

  • Environmental Policy and Law (1996), Section: United Nations Activities 26(5), 203–208.

    Google Scholar 

  • FAO, Food and Agriculture Organization (1993), 'Plant Genetic Resources. Development Education Exchange Papers (DEEP), September.

  • FAO, Food and Agriculture Organization (1997), FAO aktuell, 27. Jahrgang, Document ITCPGR/96/REP.

  • Frisvold, G. B. and P. T. Condon (1998), ‘The Convention on Biological Diversity and Agriculture: Implications and Unresolved Debates’, World Development 26, 551–570.

    Google Scholar 

  • Henne, G. and C. Loose (1997), ‘Gutes Geld für grünes Gold? Der Poker um die genetischen Ressourcen’, in G. Altner et al., eds., Jahrbuch Ökologie 1998, pp. 94–105.

  • Khalil, M. (1995), ‘Biodiversity and the Conservation of Medicinal Plants: Issues from the Perspective of the Developing World’, in T. M. Swanson, ed., Intellectual Property Rights and Biodiversity Conservation, pp. 232–253.

  • Kloppenburg, J. R. (ed.) (1988), Seeds and Sovereignty. The Use and Control of Plant Genetic Resources. Duke University Press.

  • Lerch, A. (1996), Verfügungsrechte und biologische Vielfalt. Eine Anwendung der ökonomischen Analyse der Eigentumsrechte auf die spezifischen Probleme genetischer Ressourcen. Marburg.

  • Maskus, K. E. and M. Penubarti (1995), ‘How Trade-Related are Intellectual Property Rights?’, Journal of International Economics 39, 227–248.

    Google Scholar 

  • OECD (1996a), Saving Biological Diversity. Economic Incentives. Paris.

  • OECD (1996b), Intellectual Property, Technology Transfer and Genetic Resources, OECD Survey of Current Practices and Policies. Paris.

  • OECD Proceedings (1997), Investing in Biological Diversity. Paris: The Cairns Conference.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sedjo, R. A. (1992), ‘Property Rights, Genetic Resources, and Biotechnological Change’, The Journal of Law and Economics 13, 199–213.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shand, H. (1997), Human Nature: Agricultural Biodiversity and Farm-based Food Security. Ottawa: Rural Advancement Foundation International.

    Google Scholar 

  • Swanson, T. and T. Göschl (2000), ‘Property Rights Issues Involving Plant Genetic Resources: Implications of Ownership for Economic Effiency’, Ecological Economics 32, 75–92.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tansey, G. (1999), 'des TRIPSTRADE-Abkommens im Jahr 1999, Ein Diskussionspapier, Quaker Peace & Service, London, http://www.quaker.org/quno.

    Google Scholar 

  • Taylor, M. S. (1993), ‘TRIPS, Trade, and Technology Transfer’, Canadian Journal of Economics 26, 625–637.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ulph, A. and D. Ulph (1996), ‘Trade, Strategic Innovation and Strategic Environmental Policy — A General Analysis’, in C. Carraro, Y. Katsoulacos and A. Xepapadeas, eds., Environmental Policy and Market Structure. Dordrecht, pp. 181–208.

  • Ulph, A. (1996a), ‘Strategic Environmental Policy and International Trade — the Role of Market Conduct’, in C. Carraro et al., eds., Environmental Policy and Market Structure. Dordrecht, pp. 99–127.

  • Ulph, A. (1996b), ‘Strategic Environmental Policy and International Competitiveness’, in H. Siebert, ed., Elemente einer rationalen Umweltpolitik. Tübingen, pp. 337–376.

  • UPOV, Union for the Protection of New Varieties of Plants (1997), Background Information by the Commission on Genetic Resources for Food and Agriculture, Seventh Session, 15–23 May 1997, Rome, http://www.upov.org.

  • Vishwasrao, S. (1994), ‘Intellectual Property Rights and the Mode of Technology Transfer’, Journal of Development Economics 44, 381–402.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vishwasrao, S. (1997), ‘North-South Technology Transfer Through Licensing’, The International Trade Journal 11, 485–513.

    Google Scholar 

  • Walden, I. (1995), ‘Preserving Biodiversity: The Role of Property Rights’, in T. M. Swanson, ed., Intellectual Property Rights and Biodiversity Conservation, pp. 176–197.

  • WBGU — Wissenschaftlicher Beirat der Bundesregierung Globale Umweltveränderungen (1996), Welt im Wandel: Wege zur Lösung globaler Umweltprobleme, Jahresgutachten 1995, Berlin.

  • Wood, D. (1988), ‘Crop Germplasm: Common Heritage or Farmers’ Heritage?’, in J. R. Kloppenburg, ed., Seeds and Sovereignty. The Use and Control of Plant Genetic Resources. Duke University Press, pp. 274–289.

  • Wright, D. (1993), ‘International Technology Transfer and Per-Unit Royalties’, Australian Economic Papers, 11–19.

  • Žigić, K. (1998), ‘Intellectual Property Rights Violations and Spillovers in North-South Trade’, European Economic Review 42, 1779–1799.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Droege, S., Soete, B. Trade-Related Intellectual Property Rights, North-South Trade, and Biological Diversity. Environmental and Resource Economics 19, 149–163 (2001). https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1011167017863

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1011167017863

Navigation