Bonwoo Koo

Saving seeds: the economics of conserving crop genetic resources ex situ in the future harvest centres of the CGIAR.

The economics of genebank costing CIMMYT genebank ICARDA genebank ICRISAT genebank IRRI genebank CIAT genebank Policy and management implications

The evolving landscape of plant varietal rights in the United States, 1930-2008.

The types of plants being protected, by whom and by what form of varietal right, has changed markedly since the United States first enabled intellectual property protection for plant varieties in 1930.

The Optimal Timing of Evaluation of Genebank Accessions and the Effects of Biotechnology

The lack of ex ante evaluation of germplasm in genebanks has been the single most prevalent and long-standing complaint of plant breeders about the management of genebanks. Advances in biotechnology offer the possibility of faster, cheaper and more efficient evaluation methodologies. Will these new technologies favor ex post evaluation, as some expect, or will they lead to more ex ante evaluation? Will they also lead to earlier development of varieties with specific traits in anticipation of demand for them? Will the prospect of further advances in biotechnology favor delay of evaluation and development? This paper addresses these questions in the case of evaluation of germplasm for resistance to a disease. Copyright 2000, Oxford University Press.

The economic costs of conserving genetic resources at the CGIAR centres

The 11 genebanks of the Consultative Group on International Agriculture (CGIAR) have grown considerably in size over the past few decades, currently holding about 666,000 accessions of germplasm. Conserving germplasm is a very long run, if not in perpetuity, proposition. The mismatch between the mainly annual funding support for this conservation effort and its very long-term nature and intent is a serious concern. Using the results of five CGIAR genebank case studies (accounting for 87% of the total CGIAR genebank holdings), we estimate the size of an endowment or trust fund that would be required to assure a funding stream to conserve this genetic material for future generations. The annual cost (in year 2000 US

Chapter 48 Agricultural Innovation: Investments and Incentives

) of conserving and distributing the genetic material presently held in all11 CGIAR genebanks is estimated to be 5.7 million US

The role of biodiversity products as incentives for conserving biological diversity: some instructive examples

(mUS

Fear of fraud and Internet purchasing

), which could be maintained for all future generations by setting aside a fund of 149 mUS

Does organizational innovation moderate technical innovation directly or indirectly

(invested at a real rate of interest of 4% per annum). This would be sufficient to underwrite the costs for the CGIARs current conservation activities in perpetuity (estimated to be 61 mUS

Economics of Patenting an Input Essential to Further Research

), as well as the cost of maintaining the distribution activities (88 mUS

Delineation of landscapes of emerging sciences through publication data: A case of nanoscience in Canada

) that provide germplasm to breeders, scientists, farmers and others world wide.