Innovation, Patents, and Competition in Modern Agriculture: A Case Study of Bayer and Monsanto Merger

Q2 Social Sciences Antitrust Bulletin Pub Date : 2021-03-09 DOI:10.1177/0003603X21997022
Reji K. Joseph
{"title":"Innovation, Patents, and Competition in Modern Agriculture: A Case Study of Bayer and Monsanto Merger","authors":"Reji K. Joseph","doi":"10.1177/0003603X21997022","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The use of digital technologies to aid the agronomic decision making of farmers characterizes modern agriculture. Digital farming is expected to enhance the market power of leading innovative firms in the seed industry, which is already having a high level of concentration. The merger of two leading innovative firms—Bayer and Monsanto—is to be seen in this context. This article examines the emerging anticompetitive considerations from the deal and the contribution of the Competition Commission of India in alleviating such considerations while approving the deal. It is found that threats were emerging in three areas—traits and seeds, nonselective herbicides, and digital farming platforms. To eliminate the anticompetitive effects of the deal, both the companies were required to divest their research and development intensive trait, seed, and nonselective herbicide businesses. They were also required to license the proprietary active ingredients of nonselective herbicides, if the use of their seeds was linked to the application of such herbicides, on fair, reasonable, and nondiscriminatory (FRAND) terms. They were also required to license the agronomic data, collected from India, and used in their digital platforms, to potential users on FRAND terms.","PeriodicalId":36832,"journal":{"name":"Antitrust Bulletin","volume":"66 1","pages":"214 - 224"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-03-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1177/0003603X21997022","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Antitrust Bulletin","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/0003603X21997022","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Social Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The use of digital technologies to aid the agronomic decision making of farmers characterizes modern agriculture. Digital farming is expected to enhance the market power of leading innovative firms in the seed industry, which is already having a high level of concentration. The merger of two leading innovative firms—Bayer and Monsanto—is to be seen in this context. This article examines the emerging anticompetitive considerations from the deal and the contribution of the Competition Commission of India in alleviating such considerations while approving the deal. It is found that threats were emerging in three areas—traits and seeds, nonselective herbicides, and digital farming platforms. To eliminate the anticompetitive effects of the deal, both the companies were required to divest their research and development intensive trait, seed, and nonselective herbicide businesses. They were also required to license the proprietary active ingredients of nonselective herbicides, if the use of their seeds was linked to the application of such herbicides, on fair, reasonable, and nondiscriminatory (FRAND) terms. They were also required to license the agronomic data, collected from India, and used in their digital platforms, to potential users on FRAND terms.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
现代农业中的创新、专利与竞争——以拜耳与孟山都合并为例
利用数字技术帮助农民进行农艺决策是现代农业的特点。预计数字农业将增强种子行业领先的创新企业的市场力量,该行业已经具有很高的集中度。两家领先的创新公司拜耳和孟山都的合并就是在这种背景下进行的。本文考察了该交易中出现的反竞争因素,以及印度竞争委员会在批准该交易时减轻此类考虑的贡献。研究发现,威胁出现在三个领域:性状和种子、非选择性除草剂和数字农业平台。为了消除该交易的反竞争影响,两家公司都被要求剥离其研发密集型性状、种子和非选择性除草剂业务。如果他们的种子的使用与使用非选择性除草剂有关,他们还被要求以公平、合理和非歧视(FRAND)的条款许可非选择性除草剂的专有活性成分。他们还被要求根据FRAND条款将从印度收集并用于其数字平台的农艺数据许可给潜在用户。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Antitrust Bulletin
Antitrust Bulletin Social Sciences-Law
CiteScore
1.30
自引率
0.00%
发文量
34
期刊最新文献
Geographic Market Definition in Commercial Health Insurer Matters: A Unified Approach for Merger Review, Monopolization Claims, and Monopsonization Claims Do EU and U.K. Antitrust “Bite”?: A Hard Look at “Soft” Enforcement and Negotiated Penalty Settlements Wall Street’s Practice of Compelling Confidentiality of Private Underwriting Fees: An Antitrust Violation? Two Challenges for Neo-Brandeisian Antitrust Epic Battles in Two-Sided Markets
×
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
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 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 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1