[go: up one dir, main page]
More Web Proxy on the site http://driver.im/
IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bpj/bjafio/v2y2004i2n7.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Genetically Modified Organisms: Rights To Use Commodity Names and the Lemons Problem

Author

Listed:
  • Gray Richard

    (University of Saskatchewan)

  • Moss Charles B.

    (University of Florida)

  • Schmitz Andrew

    (University of Florida)

Abstract
Genetically modified crops have met some consumer opposition domestically and abroad. This opposition has resulted in variety market and policy reactions with a large potential to disrupt trade and to become a focus of international negotiations. In this paper we consider the spillover from adopters to the non-adopters and non-consumers of GM technology. In the absence of any (organizational) transaction costs the assignment of property right to use the name corn will result in Pareto improving decisions with respect to the introduction of GM technology. However, in the presence of transaction costs the ability to use generic crop names such as corn, the adopters of GM technology have the implicit right and will impose costs on participants in the non-GM marketing channel, by creating a lemons problem. This assignment of property rights can result in the commercial introduction of GM despite potential losses in overall social welfare. If the property rights are reassigned such that the innovators are forced to segregate their GM products through labeling laws, this preempts welfare decreasing technology introduction. The relative efficiency of either allocation of property rights depends on the cost savings, rate of adoption, segregation costs, and consumers' preference for the GM crop in question. This suggests that assignment of property rights may be more effective if done on a case-by-case basis rather than a one size fits all policy.

Suggested Citation

  • Gray Richard & Moss Charles B. & Schmitz Andrew, 2004. "Genetically Modified Organisms: Rights To Use Commodity Names and the Lemons Problem," Journal of Agricultural & Food Industrial Organization, De Gruyter, vol. 2(2), pages 1-17, May.
    • Handle: RePEc:bpj:bjafio:v:2:y:2004:i:2:n:7
    DOI: 10.2202/1542-0485.1057
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.2202/1542-0485.1057
    Download Restriction: For access to full text, subscription to the journal or payment for the individual article is required.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.2202/1542-0485.1057?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
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Giancarlo Moschini & Harvey Lapan, 1997. "Intellectual Property Rights and the Welfare Effects of Agricultural R&D," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 79(4), pages 1229-1242.
    2. Ulrich, Alvin & Furtan, William H & Schmitz, Andrew, 1987. "The Cost of a Licensing System Regulation: An Example from Canadian Prairie Agriculture," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 95(1), pages 160-178, February.
    3. Williamson, Oliver, 2009. "The Theory of the Firm as Governance Structure: From Choice to Contract," Ekonomicheskaya Politika / Economic Policy, Russian Presidential Academy of National Economy and Public Administration, vol. 6, pages 111-134, December.
    4. Schmitz Troy G. & Schmitz Andrew & Moss Charles B., 2004. "Did StarLink Reduce Import Demand for Corn?," Journal of Agricultural & Food Industrial Organization, De Gruyter, vol. 2(2), pages 1-16, May.
    5. Giannakas, Konstantinos & Fulton, Murray, 2000. "The Effects of Biotechnology on Concentration and Structure in the Agricultural Inputs Industry," Cornhusker Economics 306180, University of Nebraska-Lincoln, Department of Agricultural Economics.
    6. Barzel,Yoram, 1997. "Economic Analysis of Property Rights," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521597135, February.
    7. George A. Akerlof, 1970. "The Market for "Lemons": Quality Uncertainty and the Market Mechanism," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 84(3), pages 488-500.
    8. Murphy, John A. & Furtan, W. Hartley & Schmitz, Andrew, 1993. "The gains from agricultural research under distorted trade," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 51(2), pages 161-172, June.
    9. Richard Gray & Stavroula Malla, 1998. "A Note on Evaluating Agricultural Policy in the Presence of Health Care Cost Externalities: Dairy Production Quotas and Coronary Heart Disease Costs," Canadian Journal of Agricultural Economics/Revue canadienne d'agroeconomie, Canadian Agricultural Economics Society/Societe canadienne d'agroeconomie, vol. 46(2), pages 247-256, July.
    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. Luc, Veyssiere, 2006. "Best Response to GMOs in Developing Countries," 2006 Annual meeting, July 23-26, Long Beach, CA 21075, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
    2. Kontoleon Andreas & Yabe Mitsuyasu, 2006. "Market Segmentation Analysis of Preferences for GM Derived Animal Foods in the UK," Journal of Agricultural & Food Industrial Organization, De Gruyter, vol. 4(1), pages 1-38, December.

    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. Kirsten Foss & Nicolai Foss, 2001. "Theoretical isolation in contract theory: suppressing margins and entrepreneurship," Journal of Economic Methodology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 7(3), pages 313-339.
    2. Rossi, Enrico, 2020. "Reconsidering the dual nature of property rights: personal property and capital in the law and economics of property rights," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 105840, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    3. GianCarlo Moschini, 2008. "Biotechnology and the development of food markets: retrospect and prospects," European Review of Agricultural Economics, Oxford University Press and the European Agricultural and Applied Economics Publications Foundation, vol. 35(3), pages 331-355, September.
    4. Matyukha, Andriy, 2017. "Business groups in agriculture impact of ownership structures on performance: The case of Russia's agroholdings," Studies on the Agricultural and Food Sector in Transition Economies 254051, Institute of Agricultural Development in Transition Economies (IAMO).
    5. Benito Arruñada & Giorgio Zanarone & Nuno Garoupa, 2019. "Property Rights in Sequential Exchange," The Journal of Law, Economics, and Organization, Oxford University Press, vol. 35(1), pages 127-153.
    6. Schmitz, Patrick W., 2010. "Contractual solutions to hold-up problems with quality uncertainty and unobservable investments," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 46(5), pages 807-816, September.
    7. Benito Arruñada, 2016. "Coase and the departure from property," Chapters, in: Claude Ménard & Elodie Bertrand (ed.), The Elgar Companion to Ronald H. Coase, chapter 22, pages 305-319, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    8. Douglas J. Elliott & Greg Feldberg & Andreas Lehnert, 2013. "The History of Cyclical Macroprudential Policy in the United States," Working Papers 13-08, Office of Financial Research, US Department of the Treasury.
    9. GianCarlo Moschini & Harvey E. Lapan, 2005. "Labeling Regulations and Segregation of First- and Second-Generation Genetically Modified Products: Innovation Incentives and Welfare Effects," Center for Agricultural and Rural Development (CARD) Publications 05-wp391, Center for Agricultural and Rural Development (CARD) at Iowa State University.
    10. Benito Arruñada, 2012. "Property as an economic concept: reconciling legal and economic conceptions of property rights in a Coasean framework," International Review of Economics, Springer;Happiness Economics and Interpersonal Relations (HEIRS), vol. 59(2), pages 121-144, July.
    11. Harvey E. Lapan & Giancarlo Moschini, 2004. "Innovation and Trade with Endogenous Market Failure: The Case of Genetically Modified Products," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 86(3), pages 634-648.
    12. Damian Bäumlisberger, 2021. "A Nozickian Case for Compulsory Employment Injury Insurance: The Example of Sweatshops," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 173(1), pages 13-27, September.
    13. Mark D. Flood & Jonathan Katz & Stephen J. Ong & Adam Smith, 2013. "Cryptography and the economics of supervisory information: balancing transparency and confidentiality," Working Papers (Old Series) 1312, Federal Reserve Bank of Cleveland.
    14. Stavroula Malla & Richard Gray & Peter Phillips, 2004. "Gains to Research in the Presence of Intellectual Property Rights and Research Subsidies," Review of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 26(1), pages 63-81.
    15. Arruñada, Benito, 2017. "Property as sequential exchange: the forgotten limits of private contract," Journal of Institutional Economics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 13(4), pages 753-783, December.
    16. repec:zbw:iamost:254051 is not listed on IDEAS
    17. Matyukha, Andriy, 2017. "Business groups in agriculture. Impact of ownership structures on performance: The case of Russia's agroholdings," Studies on the Agricultural and Food Sector in Transition Economies, Leibniz Institute of Agricultural Development in Transition Economies (IAMO), volume 85, number 85, September.
    18. Bowe, Michael & Golesorkhi, Sougand & Yamin, Mo, 2014. "Explaining equity shares in international joint ventures: Combining the influence of asset characteristics, culture and institutional differences," Research in International Business and Finance, Elsevier, vol. 31(C), pages 212-233.
    19. Malla, Stavroula & Gray, Richard S., 2002. "Crop Research Incentives in a Privatized Industry: A Stochastic Approach," 2002 International Congress, August 28-31, 2002, Zaragoza, Spain 24936, European Association of Agricultural Economists.
    20. Ennio E. Piano, 2017. "Free riders: the economics and organization of outlaw motorcycle gangs," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 171(3), pages 283-301, June.
    21. Wright, Brian D. & Pardey, Philip G. & Nottenburg, Carol & Koo, Bonwoo, 2007. "Agricultural Innovation: Investments and Incentives," Handbook of Agricultural Economics, in: Robert Evenson & Prabhu Pingali (ed.), Handbook of Agricultural Economics, edition 1, volume 3, chapter 48, pages 2533-2603, Elsevier.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    GMOs; property rights;

    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:bpj:bjafio:v:2:y:2004:i:2:n:7. 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: Peter Golla (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.degruyter.com .

    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.