Are intellectual property policies for gene‐edited crops fit for purpose? The perspectives of German scientists

Author:

Glenna Leland L.1ORCID

Affiliation:

1. Rural Sociology and Science, Technology & Society, Department of Agricultural Economics, Sociology & Education Pennsylvania State University 114 Armsby Building, University Park State College Pennsylvania USA

Abstract

Societal Impact StatementA growing body of research indicates that intellectual property policies for agricultural biotechnologies are hindering research and limiting the use of the technologies. Research also indicates that public resistance to agricultural biotechnologies, including transgenic and gene‐edited crops, is at least in part motivated by concerns about intellectual property restrictions. Therefore, changing the policies governing agricultural biotechnologies promises to reduce public resistance and to enhance the diffusion of research outputs. Because so many patents related to gene editing are held by universities and because so much cutting‐edge research is conducted by public scientists, exploring the scientists' perspectives on these policies offers insights into possibilities for policy changes.Summary After the European Court of Justice's ruling that gene‐edited crops would be regulated the way transgenic crops are regulated, the European Commission consulted with stakeholders and concluded that policies governing gene‐edited crops are not fit for purpose. This research explores whether public scientists in Germany also consider intellectual property policies not fit for purpose. The data come from intensive interviews with 10 scientists working at German universities and research institutes. The interviewed scientists describe how intellectual property policies limited the use of transgenic breeding techniques and how they now limit applications of gene‐editing techniques. They overwhelmingly support policy changes that facilitate the use of their scientific breakthroughs to solve problems in the world, and they do not want to see large companies use the technologies to consolidate economic power or to profit at the expense of solving problems. Because intellectual property policies are often cited as a key reason for the resistance to agricultural biotechnologies and because research indicates that current policies are not enhancing crop innovations or social welfare, a change in intellectual property policies is likely to reduce resistance to the new crop breeding technologies and yield more social benefits.

Publisher

Wiley

Subject

Horticulture,Plant Science,Ecology, Evolution, Behavior and Systematics,Forestry

Reference45 articles.

1. Perceived conflict of interest in health science partnerships

2. Inclusive innovation in crop gene editing for smallholder farmers: Status and approaches

3. Boldrin M &Levine D K. (2012). “The Case against Patents.” Working Paper No. 2012–035A Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis St. Louis MO.

Cited by 1 articles. 订阅此论文施引文献 订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3