This paper explores the relationship between intellectual property rights, competition laws and regulatory policies in case of Bt cotton seed industry in India. Using timeline analysis, the paper tracks the events to understand the temporal scope and inter-temporal dependences of the events. This study illustrates that interaction of business model and regulatory policies resulted in anti-competitiveness in the industry. The study shows multiple regulatory enforcements due to the lack of clarity and foresight. Lack of clear legislative framework, specific criteria for assessment, transparency and public involvement in the regulatory decision-making process has led to these multiple enforcements.
- CCI. (2015). Case No. 02/ 2015, Case No. 107/ 2015, Case No. 03/ 2016, Case No. 01/ 2016, Case No. 10/ 2016. Competition Commission of India (CCI), https://www.cci.gov.in/sites/default/files/Ref%20 Case%20022015%20%26%20others.pdf
- Chakraborty, S. (2015, November 15). Interplay between competition law and IPR in its regulation of market. Academike. Retrieved from https://www.lawctopus.com/academike/interplay-competition-law-ipr-regulation-market/
- Chawla, V. (2018). Monsanto’s Loss of Patent Over Bt Cotton is a Victory for Farmers and Indian Seed Companies. Economic and Political Weekly, 53(25), (Online). https://www.epw.in/engage/article/monsantos-loss-patent-bt-cotton-victory-farmers-indian-seed-companies?
- Coase, R. (1960). The problem of social cost. Journal of Law and Economics, 3, 1–44.
- Cohen, J.I. and Paarlberg, R. (2004). Unlocking crop biotechnology in developing countries - A report from field. World Development, 32(9), 1563-1577
- Correa, C. (2007). Intellectual Property and Competition Law: Exploration of Some Issues of Relevance to Developing Countries. ICTSD IPRs and Sustainable Development Programme Issue Paper No. 21. International Centre for Trade and Sustainable Development (ICTSD), Geneva, Switzerland.
- Damodaran, A. (2005). Re-Engineering Biosafety Regulations In India: Towards a Critique of Policy, Law and Prescriptions. Law Environment and Development Journal, 1, 1-20. http://www.lead-journal.org/ content/05001.pdf
- Damodharan, H. (2016, December 22). GM technology: Trait fee war between Monsanto and Indian seed firms intensifies. The Indian Express.https://indianexpress.com/article/india/gm-technology-trait-fee-war-between-monsanto-and-indian-seed-firms-intensifies-4439264/
- Den Hertog, J. (2010). Review of economic theories of regulation. Discussion Paper Series: 10-18. Tjalling C. Koopmans Research Institute, Utrecht School of Economics, Utrecht University.
- Ellickson, R. (1991). Order without Law.Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
- GEAC (2019). Biosafety Data of Approved GM crops. Genetic Engineering Appraisal Committee (GEAC), Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change, Government of India. http://www.geacindia.gov.in/biosafety-data-approved-GM-crops.aspx. Last assessed on 25-11-2019.
- Gruère, G., and Sengupta, D. (2011). Bt Cotton and Farmer Suicides in India: An Evidence-based Assessment. The Journal of Development Studies, 47(2), 316-337, doi: 10.1080/00220388.2010.492863
- Gupta, A.K., and Chandak, V. (2005). Agricultural biotechnology in India: ethics, business and politics. International Journal of Biotechnology, 7(12/3), 212-227.
- Herring, R. J. (2014). On risk and regulation: Bt crops in India. GM Crops and Food, 5(3), 204-209, doi: 10.4161/21645698.2014.950543
- Holgersson, M., Granstrand, O., and Bogers, M. (2018). The evolution of intellectual property strategy in innovation ecosystems: Uncovering complementary and substitute appropriability regimes. Long Range Planning, 51(2), 303-319.
- ISAAA. (2017). Biotech countries facts and trends: India. International Service for the Acquisition of Agri-biotech Applications (ISAAA) SEAsiaCenter, Philippines. http://www.isaaa.org/resources/ publications/biotech_country_facts_and_trends/download/ Facts%20and%20Trends%20-%20India-2017.pdf
- Kathuria, V. (2018). Conflict between Regulation and Competition Law in the Indian Telecom Sector. Economic and Political Weekly, 53(38), 38-43.
- Kranthi, K. R., and Stone, G. D. (2020). Long-term impacts of Bt cotton in India. Nature plants, 6(3), 188–196. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41477-020-0615-5.
- Kuruganti, K. (2019). Was there a victory for Monsanto in India’s Supreme Court on a patent matter? Down to Earth. https://www.downtoearth.org.in/blog/agriculture/was-there-a-victory-for-monsanto-in-india-s-supreme-court-on-a-patent-matter--62800
- Molk, P., and Rowell, A. (2016). Reregulation and the Regulatory Timeline. Iowa Law Review, 101(4), 1497. https://ilr.law.uiowa.edu/print/ volume-101-issue-6/reregulation-and-the-regulatory-timeline/ Monsanto (2019). Annual Report 2019. http://www.monsantoglobal.com/ global/in/Documents/Monsanto%20India%20Limited%20AR%20 2019.pdf.
- Murugkar, M., Ramaswami, B. and Shelar, M. (2007, September 15). Competition and Monopoly in Indian Cotton Seed Market. Economic and Political Weekly, 3781-3789.
- Newell, P. (2007). Biotech firms, biotech politics negotiating GMOs in India. Journal of Environmental Development, 16(2), 183-206.
- Pray, C.E., L. Nagarajan, J. Huang, R. Hu, and B. Ramaswami. (2011). The Impact of Bt Cotton and the Potential Impacts of Biotechnology on Other Crops in China and India. In C. A. Carter, G. Moschini, and I. Sheldon (eds)Genetically Modified Food and Global Welfare (Frontiers of Economics and Globalization), vol. 10, 83-114. Bingley, UK: Emerald.
- Qaim, M., Naik, G., Subramanian, A., and Zilberman, D. (2006). Adoption of Bt. Cotton and impact variability: insights from India. Review of Agricultural Economics,28(1), 48-58.
- Raju, K.D. (2014). Interface between Competition law and Intellectual Property Rights: A Comparative Study of the US, EU and India. Intellectual Property Rights 2,115. doi:10.4172/2375-4516.1000115
- Ramasundaram, P., Suresh, A., and Chand, R. (2011). Manipulating technology for surplus extraction: The case of Bt cotton in India. Economic and Political Weekly, 46(43), 23-26.
- Scherer, F.M. and Watal, J. (2014). Competition Policy and Intellectual Property: Insights from Developed Country Experience. Regulatory Policy Program Working Paper RPP-2014-10.Cambridge, MA: Mossavar Rahmani Center for Business and Government, Harvard Kennedy School, Harvard University.
- Scoones, I. (2003). Regulatory maneuvers: The Bt cotton controversy in India. Working paper 197. Institute of Development Studies.
- Shleifer, A (2005). Understanding regulation. European Financial Management, 11(4), 439-451.
- Srivastava, S.K. and Kolday, D. (2016). Agricultural biotechnology and crop productivity: macro-level evidences on contribution of Bt cotton in India. Current Science,110(3): 311-319.
- Stigler, G. J. (1971). The theory of economic regulation. Bell Journal of Economics, 2, 3–21.
- Subramanian, A., and Qaim, M. (2010). The impact of Bt cotton on poor households in rural India. Journal of Development Studies, 46 (2), 295-311.
- Thomas, G., and De Tavernier, J. (2017). Farmer-suicide in India: debating the role of biotechnology. Life Sciences, Society and Policy, 13, 8. doi: 10.1186/s40504-017-0052-z
- UNCTAD (2016). Examining the interface between the objectives of competition policy and intellectual property. Intergovernmental Group of Experts on Competition Law and Policy. Fifteenth Session, Geneva, 19–21 October 2016, Trade and Development Board, United Nations Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD).
- Vithal, B.M. (2018, July 17). Bt Cotton in India - Current Scenario. Cotton Statistics and News,16.