农场节省的种子、专利费率和植物育种的创新

IF 4.2 2区 经济学 Q1 AGRICULTURAL ECONOMICS & POLICY
Adrien Hervouet, Stéphane Lemarié
{"title":"农场节省的种子、专利费率和植物育种的创新","authors":"Adrien Hervouet,&nbsp;Stéphane Lemarié","doi":"10.1111/ajae.12489","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Seed innovation is one major factor for improving agricultural productivity. For some self-pollinated varieties, such as wheat, farmers have the option to buy certified seed from seed dealers or to use their own farm-saved seed. Historically, farmers could use farm-saved seeds for free, which led to reduced incentives to innovate for private breeding companies. In recent decades, several countries have established different royalty systems for farm-saved seeds to favor research investment. We developed a theoretical model to compare these different systems. We compared six stylized systems by analyzing their impact on incentives to innovate, as well as production efficiencies at both the seed and agricultural production levels. Our findings indicate that royalty systems allowing for a certain proportion of farm-saved seeds result in improved welfare. The systems that lead to the highest total welfare levels are those in which the royalty level on farm-saved seeds is regulated. This includes systems where the royalty is either directly defined by a regulator (as in the French or UK systems) or imposed to match the royalty level of the certified seeds (as in the Australian system). The Australian system performs better under high research costs. Conversely, under low research costs, the best system is either the French or the UK system, depending on the relative cost of producing farm-saved seeds versus certified seeds. In conclusion, it is possible to design efficient royalty systems to create and produce innovation, in a context where farmers can self-produce this innovation.</p>","PeriodicalId":55537,"journal":{"name":"American Journal of Agricultural Economics","volume":"107 2","pages":"465-503"},"PeriodicalIF":4.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Farm-saved seed, royalty rates, and innovation in plant breeding\",\"authors\":\"Adrien Hervouet,&nbsp;Stéphane Lemarié\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/ajae.12489\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p>Seed innovation is one major factor for improving agricultural productivity. For some self-pollinated varieties, such as wheat, farmers have the option to buy certified seed from seed dealers or to use their own farm-saved seed. Historically, farmers could use farm-saved seeds for free, which led to reduced incentives to innovate for private breeding companies. In recent decades, several countries have established different royalty systems for farm-saved seeds to favor research investment. We developed a theoretical model to compare these different systems. We compared six stylized systems by analyzing their impact on incentives to innovate, as well as production efficiencies at both the seed and agricultural production levels. Our findings indicate that royalty systems allowing for a certain proportion of farm-saved seeds result in improved welfare. The systems that lead to the highest total welfare levels are those in which the royalty level on farm-saved seeds is regulated. This includes systems where the royalty is either directly defined by a regulator (as in the French or UK systems) or imposed to match the royalty level of the certified seeds (as in the Australian system). The Australian system performs better under high research costs. Conversely, under low research costs, the best system is either the French or the UK system, depending on the relative cost of producing farm-saved seeds versus certified seeds. In conclusion, it is possible to design efficient royalty systems to create and produce innovation, in a context where farmers can self-produce this innovation.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":55537,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"American Journal of Agricultural Economics\",\"volume\":\"107 2\",\"pages\":\"465-503\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-08-07\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"American Journal of Agricultural Economics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"96\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/ajae.12489\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"经济学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"AGRICULTURAL ECONOMICS & POLICY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"American Journal of Agricultural Economics","FirstCategoryId":"96","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/ajae.12489","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"AGRICULTURAL ECONOMICS & POLICY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

种子创新是提高农业生产力的一个主要因素。对于一些自花授粉的品种,如小麦,农民可以选择从种子经销商那里购买经过认证的种子,或者使用自己农场保存的种子。从历史上看,农民可以免费使用农场保存下来的种子,这导致私营育种公司的创新动力降低。近几十年来,一些国家为农业保存的种子建立了不同的权利金制度,以促进研究投资。我们开发了一个理论模型来比较这些不同的系统。我们通过分析它们对创新激励的影响,以及种子和农业生产水平的生产效率,对六种程式化系统进行了比较。我们的研究结果表明,特许权使用费制度允许一定比例的农场保存种子,从而提高了福利。导致最高总福利水平的制度是那些对农场保存的种子的权利金水平加以管制的制度。这包括权利金由监管机构直接定义的制度(如法国或英国的制度),或根据认证种子的权利金水平强加的制度(如澳大利亚的制度)。在高昂的研究成本下,澳大利亚的教育体系表现得更好。相反,在研究成本较低的情况下,最好的系统是法国或英国的系统,这取决于生产农场节省的种子与经过认证的种子的相对成本。总之,在农民能够自主创新的情况下,设计有效的权利金制度来创造和产生创新是可能的。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Farm-saved seed, royalty rates, and innovation in plant breeding

Seed innovation is one major factor for improving agricultural productivity. For some self-pollinated varieties, such as wheat, farmers have the option to buy certified seed from seed dealers or to use their own farm-saved seed. Historically, farmers could use farm-saved seeds for free, which led to reduced incentives to innovate for private breeding companies. In recent decades, several countries have established different royalty systems for farm-saved seeds to favor research investment. We developed a theoretical model to compare these different systems. We compared six stylized systems by analyzing their impact on incentives to innovate, as well as production efficiencies at both the seed and agricultural production levels. Our findings indicate that royalty systems allowing for a certain proportion of farm-saved seeds result in improved welfare. The systems that lead to the highest total welfare levels are those in which the royalty level on farm-saved seeds is regulated. This includes systems where the royalty is either directly defined by a regulator (as in the French or UK systems) or imposed to match the royalty level of the certified seeds (as in the Australian system). The Australian system performs better under high research costs. Conversely, under low research costs, the best system is either the French or the UK system, depending on the relative cost of producing farm-saved seeds versus certified seeds. In conclusion, it is possible to design efficient royalty systems to create and produce innovation, in a context where farmers can self-produce this innovation.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
American Journal of Agricultural Economics
American Journal of Agricultural Economics 管理科学-农业经济与政策
CiteScore
9.10
自引率
4.80%
发文量
77
审稿时长
12-24 weeks
期刊介绍: The American Journal of Agricultural Economics provides a forum for creative and scholarly work on the economics of agriculture and food, natural resources and the environment, and rural and community development throughout the world. Papers should relate to one of these areas, should have a problem orientation, and should demonstrate originality and innovation in analysis, methods, or application. Analyses of problems pertinent to research, extension, and teaching are equally encouraged, as is interdisciplinary research with a significant economic component. Review articles that offer a comprehensive and insightful survey of a relevant subject, consistent with the scope of the Journal as discussed above, will also be considered. All articles published, regardless of their nature, will be held to the same set of scholarly standards.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信