Peer review

In many countries, farmer saved seed (FSS) competes directly with a highly regulated commercial seed industry that sells certified seed. Opponents to the use FSS argue that it reduces the royalty income for plant breeders and is inferior in quality, which reduces farm profitability. We argue that because farmers have knowledge about field history and the quality of saved seed, they can make profit enhancing decisions to use, or not to use, FSS. We also show that payment of royalties is a matter of intellectual property rights and not directly a function of the use of FSS. Notably, Australia actively promotes the use of FSS for wheat and has some of the highest levels of rates of royalty revenue collection in the world.

Text in English