DOCSLIB.ORG

Joseph Henry Vogel* of the “Study on Domestic Measures” by Margo A

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Joseph Henry Vogel* of the “Study on Domestic Measures” by Margo A Peer Review by Joseph Henry Vogel* of the “Study on Domestic Measures” by Margo A. Bagley et al with reference to “Combined Study on Traceability and Databases” by Fabian Rohden et al and “Study on Concept and Scope” by Wael Houssen et al (cc) 2019. Joseph Henry Vogel 29 November 2019, Department of Economics, University of Puerto Rico-Río Piedras [email protected] Key messages: • Can one analyze domestic measures on a term which is (1) undefined, (2) deemed not appropriate, (3) unused in science and (4) universally absent in national legislation? The cart is out of sight of the horse. The inclusive approach--examining whatever DSI could possibly mean---has rendered the study leaden. Frank discussion is needed regarding the cart and the horse. Non-rational behavior is germane to frankness. • Enclose quotations around the first usage of any big idea, thereby signaling that a literature exists. “Bounded openness” and “natural information” are not enclosed or duly attributed in the narrative. The etymology of “digital sequence information” is also absent. Its genesis in “digital biopiracy” sheds light on a modality of ABS that is fair, equitable and efficient. • Whenever possible, difficult-to-locate references should be complemented by similar open- access references. The publications cited on the economics of information and bounded openness are not the most accessible that exist. Preamble: Non-conducive to peer review is the template format. Copyediting may require numbered lines to locate errors in punctuation, spelling and grammar; peer reviews do not. Critique requires narrative. This review is the second in a trilogy that addresses foundational flaws in Decision 14/20. Inasmuch as the four commissioned studies are logically ordered, the trilogy should have begun with the first of the four, viz. the study on concept and scope. That, however, was impossible. Publication of the Combined Study 2&3 preceded Study 4 by eight days and Study 1 by twenty-three. A deadline for submission of reviews was one month after publication of the study. Because the Combined Study and Study 4 were released before Study 1, the corresponding reviews are out of sync. Hence, the discussion may seem in medias res. To the extent possible, each review has been written to stand alone. Nevertheless, the reader of any one review should read the other two. _____________________________ *The author acknowledges the discussion in the graduate seminar on the Economics of Natural Resources, Fall Semester 2019, Department of Economics, University of Puerto Rico-Río Piedras. Feedback on preliminary drafts began the week after release of Study 4 and continued up to the day before submission. Valuable insights emerged thanks to Juan Pablo Acosta-Barreras, Angel C. Pérez-Dias, Gabriel J Armador-Cruz, Ivan E. Ramírez-Quiñones, Lian Portell-Torres and Paola T. Gautier-Ortiz. 1. Introduction “Sunk costs” is the metaphor for mistaken decisions that prove resilient. In layman’s terms, a decision made does not justify its continuance. Future benefits must be weighed against future costs. When benefits come up short, action should be suspended. The vociferous rejection of “digital sequence information on genetic resources” offers hope that DSI will be displaced by a better term and the fallacy of sunk costs, averted.1 But how, pray tell, did DSI ever get this far? The cart is out of sight of the horse. Frank discussion of the cart and the horse is absent in Study 4 on “how domestic measures address benefit-sharing arising from commercial and non-commercial use of digital sequence information on genetic resources”. The frankness should begin in the Introduction and continue through the Conclusion. Self-appraisal should be the overarching recommendation.2 Inasmuch as “[t]here is only one psychology”, 3 non-rational behavior is germane to the discussion. Instincts, proclivities and emotions have frustrated movement forward on a modality of ABS that is fair, equitable and efficient. Study 4 is an opportunity to make a foray into the psychology of decision making in the Conference of the Parties (COP). Just as one cannot trace DSI in non-existent databanks, one cannot examine domestic measures on DSI when national legislation does not exist. Despite the enclosure of DSI in quotation marks throughout Study 4, statements such as the following enable equivocation: “The EU Guidance Document explains that users must respect any conditions in MAT that deal with ‘DSI’” (lines 14-15, p. 19).4 In response to the request of Decision 14/20 (paragraph 11(e)), one sentence would have sufficed: No national legislation on DSI was found in any country, hence no domestic measure exists. In light of the impossibility of the commission, the authors of Study 4 adopted a tactic distinct from those of the Combined Study. Whereas the latter attempted to study the one thing that could be traced, viz., Nucleotide Sequence Data (NSD), the former conjured up all conceivable possibilities. Inclusiveness was trumpeted (line 11, p. 8). In the spirit of “moving forward”, 5 What is wrong with that? 1 Submissions from Parties, other Governments, relevant organizations and stakeholders, 2017-2018 inter-sessional period, https://www.cbd.int/dsi-gr/2017-2018/#submissions 2 Jared Diamond, Upheaval: Turning Points for Nations in Crisis, New York, Little, Brown and Company, 2019. 3 Konrad Z. Lorenz and Paul Leyhausen, Motivation of Human and Animal Behavior, New York, Van Nostrand Reinhold, 1973, p. xi. 4 Readers are induced to commit the fallacy of equivocation. The substitution of “DSI” for distinct regulatory language implies that its meaning, albeit undefined, is nevertheless invariant throughout the document. But regulatory language varies. 5 A search of the catchphrase “moving forward” generates 10 pages of hits on the portal of the UN CBD Secretariat. 2 Smoke billows. Lost is the reason for the “phenomenon which goes by the placeholder DSI”, hereafter the Phenom.6 Obscured is the well published solution for ABS.7 Psychology can address the dysfunction. Examination proceeds by itemizing how specific non- rational behaviors make contact with Study 4. Heeding the generic advice of the Noam Chomsky, Parties, other governments and stakeholders must “face honestly and realistically the question of how policy decisions are made”.8 2. Information Overload Google makes desktop experiments possible. Type "‘access to genetic resources’ benefit sharing” into the search engine. About 269,000 results will emerge. Now enter the Google-Scholar engine and repeat the search. The results shrink by 95% to a still whopping 12,100 results (9:00 PM UTC 24 November 2019). Into this sea of information, comes Decision 14/20.9 Four studies were commissioned. Study 4 is 69 pages and 30,000 words, which is the length of a novella. Similar in wordiness are the Combined Study and Study 1. Will anyone read it all? Digest it all? A Google Scholar search of “‘information overload’ psychology” generates, ironically, 61,300 hits. Although the neologism was launched by Bertram Gross in 1964, the Greeks had already identified the problem some twenty-five centuries earlier. 10 Gross’ definition can serve the COP well: Information overload occurs when the amount of input to a system exceeds its processing capacity. Decision makers have fairly limited cognitive processing capacity. Consequently, when information overload occurs, it is likely that a reduction in decision quality will occur.11 6 Peer Review by Joseph Henry Vogel* of the ‘Combined Study on Traceability and Databases’ by Fabian Rohden et al with reference to “Study on Concept and Scope” by Wael Houssen et al and “Study on Domestic Measures” by Margo Bagley et al”. 2019-2020 Inter-sessional Period, Studies on Digital Sequence Information on Genetic Resources, United Nations Secretariat on the Convention on Biological Diversity, 19 November 2019, https://www.cbd.int/abs/DSI-peer/2019/Study2-3/ JosephHenryVogel.pdf 7 For the most recent expression in non-technical language, see Manuel Ruiz Muller, Joseph Henry Vogel, Klaus Angerer and Nicolas Pauchard, “‘Access to Genetic Resources and Benefit-Sharing’ in the Post-2020 Global Biodiversity Framework”, Op- Ed, Enhanced Integrated Framework (EIF), December 2019, https://trade4devnews.enhancedif.org/en/op-ed/access-genetic- resources-benefit-sharing 8 Noam Chomsky, Who Rules the World? New York, Metropolitan Books Henry Hold and Company, 2016, p. 161. 9 Decision adopted by the Conference of the Parties to the Convention on Biological Diversity 14/20, Digital Sequence Information on Genetic Resources, 30 November 2018, https://www.cbd.int/doc/decisions/cop-14/cop-14-dec-20-en.pdf 10 Stina Johnsson, “This will make you reconsider the ‘information overload’ problem”, Medium, 26 March 2018, https:// medium.com/@stinajonsson/this-will-make-you-reconsider-the-information-overload-problem-ae8964445e9d 11 Ibid. 3 What to do? Garrett Hardin offered an answer, anchored in Science: Fortunately, there is a counterforce to information overload: theory construction. A good theory compacts a vast body of facts into a few words or equations. For example, before Gregor Mendel published his theory of heredity, some 8,000 pages of scholarly discussion had been produced on the subject. All these documents became useless upon the publication of Mendel’s forty-page paper. Today more than a century later, we can condense Mendel’s findings into a single page.12 Applying the appropriate theory---economics---to ABS compacts what needs to be known into ten
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Tragedy of the Commons : Th
    tragedy of the commons : The New Palgrave Dictionary of Economics http://www.dictionaryofeconomics.com/article?id=pde2008_T000193&pr... tragedy of the commons Elinor Ostrom From The New Palgrave Dictionary of Economics, Second Edition, 2008 Edited by Steven N. Durlauf and Lawrence E. Blume Abstract ‘The tragedy of the commons’ arises when it is difficult and costly to exclude potential users from common-pool resources that yield finite flows of benefits, as a result of which those resources will be exhausted by rational, utility-maximizing individuals rather than conserved for the benefit of all. Pessimism about the possibility of users voluntarily cooperating to prevent overuse has led to widespread central control of common-pool resources. But such control has itself frequently resulted in resource overuse. In practice, especially where they can communicate, users often develop rules that limit resource use and conserve resources. Keywords collective action; common-pool resources; common property; free rider problem; Hardin, G.; open-access resources; private property; social dilemmas; state property; tragedy of the commons Article The term ‘the tragedy of the commons’ was first introduced by Garrett Hardin (1968) in an important article in Science. Hardin asked us to envision a pasture ‘open to all’ in which each herder received large benefits from selling his or her own animals while facing only small costs of overgrazing. When the number of animals exceeds the capacity of the pasture, each herder is still motivated to add more animals since the herder receives all of the proceeds from the sale of animals and only a partial share of the cost of overgrazing.
    [Show full text]
  • Lifeboat Ethics: the Case Against Helping the Poor
    Lifeboat Ethics: the Case Against Helping the Poor by Garrett Hardin, Psychology Today, September 1974 Environmentalists use the metaphor of the earth as a "spaceship" in trying to persuade countries, industries and people to stop wasting and polluting our natural resources. Since we all share life on this planet, they argue, no single person or institution has the right to destroy, waste, or use more than a fair share of its resources. But does everyone on earth have an equal right to an equal share of its resources? The spaceship metaphor can be dangerous when used by misguided idealists to justify suicidal policies for sharing our resources through uncontrolled immigration and foreign aid. In their enthusiastic but unrealistic generosity, they confuse the ethics of a spaceship with those of a lifeboat. A true spaceship would have to be under the control of a captain, since no ship could possibly survive if its course were determined by committee. Spaceship Earth certainly has no captain; the United Nations is merely a toothless tiger, with little power to enforce any policy upon its bickering members. If we divide the world crudely into rich nations and poor nations, two thirds of them are desperately poor, and only one third comparatively rich, with the United States the wealthiest of all. Metaphorically each rich nation can be seen as a lifeboat full of comparatively rich people. In the ocean outside each lifeboat swim the poor of the world, who would like to get in, or at least to share some of the wealth. What should the lifeboat passengers do? First, we must recognize the limited capacity of any lifeboat.
    [Show full text]
  • Exclusivity and the Construction of Intellectual Property Markets
    The Fable of the Commons: Exclusivity and the Construction of Intellectual Property Markets Shubha Ghosh* TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION ................................................................................... 857 I. LOOKING BEYOND THE COMMONS: TURNING HIGH TRAGEDY INTO LOW DRAMA .................................................................... 860 A. The Fable of the Commons................................................. 861 B. Governing the Commons Through the Goals of Distributive Justice ............................................................ 864 II. THE DIMENSIONS OF DISTRIBUTIVE JUSTICE.............................. 870 A. Creators ............................................................................ 871 B. Creators and Users............................................................ 876 C. Intergenerational Justice.................................................... 879 III. DISTRIBUTIVE JUSTICE IN PRACTICE .......................................... 880 A. Fair Use: Allocating Surplus Among Creators and Users .. 881 B. Secondary Liability: Spanning Generational Divides......... 883 C. Antitrust: Natural and Cultural Monopolies and the Limits of Exclusivity in the Marketplace ............................ 886 D. Traditional Knowledge: Expanding Canons and the Global Marketplace ........................................................... 888 CONCLUSION....................................................................................... 889 * Professor of Law, Southern Methodist University, Dedman School
    [Show full text]
  • Epistemological Implications of the Tragedy of the Commons
    BUSSECON REVIEW OF SOCIAL SCIENCE 1(1) (2019) 01-05 BUSSECON REVIEW OF SOCIAL SCIENCES BRSS VOL 1 NO 1 ISSN: 2687-2285 Available online at www.bussecon.com Journal homepage: https://www.bussecon.com/ojs/index.php/brss Epistemological implications of the tragedy of the commons Doaa M. Salmana*, Nadine Kamelb a Professor of Economics and Finance, Head of economics department, Associate Dean , October University for Modern Sciences and Arts, Egypt bOctober University for Modern Sciences and Arts, Egypt A R T I C L E I N F O A B S T R A C T Article history: This paper defines and examines the Garett Hardin’s concept of the Tragedy of the Commons. First, an Received 15 March 19 introductory to the concept is presented along with an extensive critique on Hardin’s 1968 impactful Received in revised form 17 June 19 publication. Second, although the tragedy of the commons belies in the field of environmental economics, Accepted 27 June 19 an extensive research is conducted on how the concept has naturally extended to other cornerstones such as Philosophy, Ethics & Morality, and human behaviour. The objective of this paper is to not see whether the concept is dubbed correct or erroneous, but rather urge readers to take a collective stand regardless of the Keywords: universal validity of the concept and shed some serious insight on the hazards of climate change and pursuit Tragedy of the commons of self-interest. Environmental degradation JEL Classification: O13 O140 © 2019 Bussecon International Academy. Hosting by Bussecon International. All rights reserved.
    [Show full text]
  • The Economics of Information, Studiously Ignored in the Nagoya Protocol on Access to Genetic Resources and Benefit Sharing
    Law Environment and Development JournalLEAD THE ECONOMICS OF INFORMATION, STUDIOUSLY IGNORED IN THE NAGOYA PROTOCOL ON ACCESS TO GENETIC RESOURCES AND BENEFIT SHARING Joseph Henry Vogel, Nora Álvarez-Berríos, Norberto Quiñones-Vilches, Jeiger L. Medina-Muñiz, Dionisio Pérez-Montes, Arelis I. Arocho-Montes, Nicole Val-Merniz, Ricardo Fuentes-Ramírez, Gabriel Marrero-Girona, Emmanuel Valcárcel Mercado, Julio Santiago-Ríos ARTICLE VOLUME 7/1 LEAD Journal (Law, Environment and Development Journal) is a peer-reviewed academic publication based in New Delhi and London and jointly managed by the School of Law, School of Oriental and African Studies (SOAS) - University of London and the International Environmental Law Research Centre (IELRC). LEAD is published at www.lead-journal.org ISSN 1746-5893 The Managing Editor, LEAD Journal, c/o International Environmental Law Research Centre (IELRC), International Environment House II, 1F, 7 Chemin de Balexert, 1219 Châtelaine-Geneva, Switzerland, Tel/fax: + 41 (0)22 79 72 623, [email protected] ARTICLE THE ECONOMICS OF INFORMATION, STUDIOUSLY IGNORED IN THE NAGOYA PROTOCOL ON ACCESS TO GENETIC RESOURCES AND BENEFIT SHARING Joseph Henry Vogel*, Nora Álvarez-Berríos, Norberto Quiñones-Vilches, Jeiger L. Medina-Muñiz, Dionisio Pérez-Montes, Arelis I. Arocho-Montes, Nicole Val-Merniz, Ricardo Fuentes-Ramírez, Gabriel Marrero-Girona, Emmanuel Valcárcel Mercado, Julio Santiago-Ríos This document can be cited as Joseph Henry Vogel et al., ‘The Economics of Information, Studiously Ignored in the Nagoya Protocol on Access to Genetic Resources and Benefit Sharing’, 7/1 Law, Environment and Development Journal (2011), p. 52, available at http://www.lead-journal.org/content/11052.pdf Joseph Henry Vogel, Professor of Economics, University of Puerto Rico-Río Piedras (UPR-RP), PO Box 9021833 San Juan, PR, 00902-1833 USA.
    [Show full text]
  • Before the Tragedy of the Commons: Early Modern Economic Considerations of the Public Use of Natural Resources
    409 Before the Tragedy of the Commons: Early Modern Economic Considerations of the Public Use of Natural Resources Nathaniel Wolloch* This article distinguishes between the precise legal and economic approach to the commons used by Hardin and many other modern commentators, and the broader post-Hardinian concept utilized in environmentally-oriented discussions and aiming to limit the use of the commons for the sake of preservation. Particularly in the latter case, it is claimed, any notion of the tragedy of the commons is distinctly a modern twentieth-century one, and was foreign to the early modern and even nineteenth-century outlooks. This was true of the early modern mercantilists, and also of classical political economists such as Adam Smith and even, surprisingly, Malthus, as well as of Jevons and his neoclassical discussion aimed at maximizing the long-term use of Britain’s coal reserves. One intellectual who did recognize the problematic possibility of leaving some tracts of land in their pristine condition to answer humanity’s need for a spiritual connection with nature was J. S. Mill, but even he regarded this as in essence almost a utopian ideal. The notion of the tragedy of the commons in its broader sense is therefore a distinctly modern one. Was there a concept of the tragedy of the commons before William Forster Lloyd in 1833, the precedent noted by Garrett Hardin himself?1 If we mean by this an exact concept akin to the modern recognition that population pressure leads to the irrevocable depletion and even destruction of irreplaceable natural resources, then the answer by and large is negative.
    [Show full text]
  • Politics of Political Economy: Revisiting Elinor Ostrom and Garrett Hardin
    POLITICS OF POLITICAL ECONOMY: REVISITING ELINOR OSTROM AND GARRETT HARDIN Will Parsley TC 660H Plan II Honors Program The University of Texas at Austin November 29, 2016 __________________________________________ Dr. Alexandra K. Wettlaufer French and Italian, Plan II Honors Supervising Professor __________________________________________ Joseph Bailey Jr. Plan II Honors Second Reader ABSTRACT Author: Will Parsley Title: Politics of Political Economy: Revisiting Elinor Ostrom and Garrett Hardin Supervising Professors: Dr. Alexandra K. Wettlaufer and Joseph Bailey Jr. The goal of this thesis is to provide perspective on Prof. Elinor Ostrom’s (d. 2012) challenges and achievements in the field of Political Economy. Her works, chiefly Governing the Commons: The Evolution of Institutions of Collective Action published in 1990, are emblematic of a consensus change in the lens through which policy makers, economists, and everyday human beings view management of shared natural resources. Elinor “Lin” Ostrom’s thinking typifies that of the model 21st-century political economist: combining creative vision with dogged empirical research to address wholly new and distinctly modern sets of problems. Professor Ostrom tackled problems such as wildlife preservation, urban water management, and fishery conservation among others. Despite receiving the Nobel Prize in Economics in 2009, her body of work on institutions for collective action is often undercut by its unearned reputation as a direct rebuttal to Garrett Hardin’s controversial essay “The Tragedy of the Commons,” published in 1968. However, Ostrom's work stands alone. A clear-eyed review of political economics reveals the triumph of her indomitable conviction in her method over barriers created by gender- prejudice. 2 Introduction Political Economy is young academic field that features creative combinations of economics, political science, and ecology to solve humankind’s oldest resource problems.
    [Show full text]
  • Property in Land
    Article Property in Land Robert C. Ellicksont CONTENTS INTRODUCTION ............................................. 1317 I. THE CASE FOR INDIVIDUAL OWNERSHIP OF LAND .................. 1322 A. Three Simple Land Regimes .............................. 1323 B. Small Events: The Relative Ease of MonitoringBoundaries ........ 1327 1. The Genius of Individual Land Ownership ................ 1327 2. Technologiesfor Marking, Defending, and Proving Boundaries . 1328 C. Medium Events: A Simple Way to Promote Cooperative Relations ... 1330 II. THE ADVANTAGES OF GROUP OWNERSHIP OF LAND .................. 1332 A. When Returns Increase with Parcel Size ..................... 1332 1. Efficient Boundaries ................................. 1332 2. Large Events ..................................... 1334 B. Three Pioneer Settlements ............................... 1335 1. Jamestown ........................................ 1336 2. Plymouth .......................................... 1338 3. Salt Lake City ...................................... 1339 t Walter E. Meyer Professor of Property and Urban Law, Yale Law School. I thank participants in workshops at the Harvard, University of Toronto, and Yale Law Schools for comments on a preliminary draft. I am especially indebted to Betsy Clark, Jim Coleman, Rob Daines, Harold Demsetz, Henry Hansmann, Jim Krier, Tony Kronman, John Langbein, Eric Rasmusen, Roberta Romano, Richard Ross, David Schmidtz, Peter Schuck, Jim Scott, Steve Shavell, Paul Stephan, Ed Zelinsky, and, as always, Carol Rose. Simon Frankel, Robin Kelsey,
    [Show full text]
  • An Introduction to Ostrom's Eight Principles for Sustainable
    An Introduction to Ostrom’s Eight Principles for Sustainable Governance of Common-Pool Resources as a Possible Framework for Sustainable Governance of Space T. Chow, Secure World Foundation, [email protected] B. Weeden, Secure World Foundation, [email protected] Abstract This paper outlines the “tragedy of the commons,” reviews Nobel Prize Winner1 Elinor Ostrom’s principles for sustainable governance of common-pool resources (CPR), and relates both to outer space. Ostrom’s principles were distilled from decades of studies on dozens of CPR situations. They capture the best practices of CPRs that have been used sustainably for decades or even centuries, thus avoiding the famous “tragedy of the commons” without relying on privatization or a “Leviathan” authority. When viewed in the context of space sustainability and governance, these principles highlight some long- standing challenges and emerging issues. Over the past few years, achieving the long-term sustainability of space activities has become a central goal for many, both at the national and international level. However, while more policymakers and stakeholders are recognizing the importance of space sustainability, none have spelled out an effective governance strategy, and accompanying policies, for accomplishing it. This paper concludes that Ostrom’s principles can potentially inform those ongoing policy initiatives and highlight specific areas on which to focus initial space sustainability efforts. Introduction Over the last few years, the goal of space sustainability has become increasingly important within the field of space policy. Although many have long recognized the importance of outer space for national and international security and global business, there is a growing realization that the ability to use space for its benefits on Earth is not guaranteed forever.
    [Show full text]
  • Open Access Commons
    Open Access and Information Commons1 Yochai Benkler Open access commons are family of institutional arrangements that are far more pervasive in modern complex economies than is usually recognized in the economic literature. Core resources necessary for communications, innovation, trade, transportation, and energy are managed on the basis of symmetric use privileges open to all, deploying nondiscriminatory allocation based on queuing where congestion occurs, rather than on exclusive proprietary control used to achieve price clearance. Highways, roads and sidewalks, navigable waterways, and open squares are central to intercity and urban commerce. The public domain in knowledge, data, information, and culture forms the foundation of innovation, markets, and creativity. Open standards, the core Internet protocols, unlicensed wireless spectrum, and the privately-created open access commons in Free and Open Source Software (FOSS) runs most Internet infrastructure. More ambiguously, common carriage and public utilities that characterize basic infrastructures for energy and wired communications exhibit full or partial characteristics of open access commons. The defining characteristic of open access commons, by comparison to property, whether individual or collective, is their utilization of (a) symmetric use privileges for (b) an open, undefined set of users in the general public, rather than (a’) asymmetric exclusive control rights located in the hands of (b’) an individual legal entity or defined group (club) use, and (c) their primary reliance on queuing and some form of governance-based allocation, rather than (c)’ price-cleared models, for congestion-clearance and management. Far from being necessarily less efficient or unsustainable, for substantial classes of resources we have observed many critical resources migrating from provisioning based on a reasonably well-developed market in private exclusive rights to open access commons.
    [Show full text]
  • Examining the Tragedy of the Commons Dilemma: Looking at the New Hampshire Fishing Industry
    University of New Hampshire University of New Hampshire Scholars' Repository Honors Theses and Capstones Student Scholarship Spring 2019 Examining the Tragedy of the Commons Dilemma: Looking at the New Hampshire Fishing Industry Peter A. Brown Follow this and additional works at: https://scholars.unh.edu/honors Part of the Business Law, Public Responsibility, and Ethics Commons, and the Taxation Commons Recommended Citation Brown, Peter A., "Examining the Tragedy of the Commons Dilemma: Looking at the New Hampshire Fishing Industry" (2019). Honors Theses and Capstones. 439. https://scholars.unh.edu/honors/439 This Senior Honors Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by the Student Scholarship at University of New Hampshire Scholars' Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in Honors Theses and Capstones by an authorized administrator of University of New Hampshire Scholars' Repository. For more information, please contact [email protected]. TRAGEDY OF THE COMMONS: FISHING IN NH 0 2019 Examining the Tragedy of the Commons Dilemma: Looking at the New Hampshire Fishing Industry By Peter Brown Faculty Advisor: John Tommasi UNDERGRADUATE HONORS THESIS UNIVERSITY OF NEW HAMPSHIRE 1 Table of Contents Abstract……………………………………………………………………………………………2 Literature Review………………………………………………………………………………….2 Research Topic…………………………………………………………………………………….7 Data and Methodology…………………………………………………………………………….7 Model……………………………………………………………………………………………...8 Results……………………………………………………………………………………………..8 Interpretation………………………………………………………………………………………9
    [Show full text]
  • Participatory Plant Breeding, Open Source Seeds, and Acknowledging User Innovation in Agriculture
    AOKI FINAL 3/30/2009 11:40:37 PM “FREE SEEDS, NOT FREE BEER”: PARTICIPATORY PLANT BREEDING, OPEN SOURCE SEEDS, AND ACKNOWLEDGING USER INNOVATION IN AGRICULTURE Keith Aoki* INTRODUCTION In the context of user-innovation, agriculture has been a field where farmers substantively contributed to developing and improving existing and new plant varieties. This essay paraphrases Free Software Foundation founder and computer programmer par excellence Richard Stallman’s description of what “free software” means in the context of what the open source software movement may have to impart to contemporary plant breeding. It looks at how the rise and expansion of intellectual property rights in plants and varieties during the twentieth century has significantly reduced the role of farmers in plant breeding, turning them into consumers providing labor to raise crops in which others hold the underlying intellectual property rights. This essay makes three basic points. First, it examines the shift in the treatment of plant genetic resources (PGRs) from “common heritage” to “sovereign property.” This shift occurred during 1980s through the 1990s and was embodied in the characterization of PGRs in the 1983 International Undertaking on Plant Genetic Resources (IUPGR) to the characterization in the 1992 Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) as “sovereign property.” This was a development that was harmonious to expanding intellectual property rights in such resources as articulated and required by the 1994 Trade Related Aspects of Intellectual Property (TRIPS). Secondly, this essay stresses the relationship between the public domain and intellectual property rights by examining the difference between “open- access” resources, where no one has the right to exclude, and “limited * Professor of Law, University of California-Davis King Hall School of Law.
    [Show full text]