Research Benefits (research + benefit)

Distribution by Scientific Domains


Selected Abstracts


Ex ante analysis of the benefits of transgenic drought tolerance research on cereal crops in low-income countries

AGRICULTURAL ECONOMICS, Issue 4 2009
Genti Kostandini
Drought tolerance; Transgenic; Research benefits; Intellectual property rights Abstract This article develops a framework to examine the ex ante benefits of transgenic research on drought in eight low-income countries, including the benefits to producers and consumers from farm income stabilization and the potential magnitude of private sector profits from intellectual property rights (IPRs). The framework employs country-specific agroecological,drought risk zones and considers both yield increases and yield variance reductions when estimating producer and consumer benefits from research. Benefits from yield variance reductions are shown to be an important component of aggregate drought research benefits, representing 40% of total benefits across the eight countries. Further, estimated annual benefits of US$178 million to the private sector suggest that significant incentives exist for participation in transgenic drought tolerance research. [source]


An ex ante economic and policy analysis of research on genetic resistance to livestock disease: trypanosomosis in Africa

AGRICULTURAL ECONOMICS, Issue 2-3 2001
Cesar A. Falconi
Abstract This paper undertakes an ex ante economic analysis of research on how resistance to trypanosomosis-a dominant livestock disease in Africa-can be maintained and enhanced while retaining and reinforcing characteristics of economic importance to farmers, and on how,trypanotolerance' can be imparted to susceptible animals while retaining their other important traits. The results indicate that potential benefits to research-historically field-based but increasingly biotechnology-driven-range from two to nine times potential costs and that the internal rate of return on investments can be six times the real interest rate. Field-based research, while exhibiting lower potential benefits on aggregate than does biotechnology research, is also less costly and, because of its more immediate payback, has higher internal rates of return. Returns to biotechnology research hinge on close links with field-based research and on strategic but relatively small incremental human and capital investments. The results also suggest that further research is needed to consistently identify and track the impacts of alternative intellectual property rights (IPRs) options on the levels and distributions of biotechnology research benefits. [source]


Measuring research benefits in an imperfect market: second comment

AGRICULTURAL ECONOMICS, Issue 2 2000
Garth John Holloway
Abstract This note generalizes a finding about the necessary and sufficient conditions for research to generate greater benefits in the presence of distortions and highlights a significant source of bias in conventional cost-benefit calculations. [source]


Measuring research benefits in an imperfect market: second reply

AGRICULTURAL ECONOMICS, Issue 2 2000
J.P. Voon
No abstract is available for this article. [source]


Levy-funded research choices by producers and society

AUSTRALIAN JOURNAL OF AGRICULTURAL & RESOURCE ECONOMICS, Issue 1 2004
Julian M. Alston
Commodity levies are used increasingly to fund producer collective goods such as research and promotion. In the present paper we examine theoretical relationships between producer and national benefits from levy-funded research, and consider the implications for the appropriate rates of matching government grants, applied with a view to achieving a closer match between producer and national interests. In many cases the producer and national optima coincide. First, regardless of the form of the supply shift, when product demand is perfectly elastic, or all the product is exported, domestic benefits and costs of levy-funded research all go to producers and they have appropriate incentives. Second, if research causes a parallel supply shift, the producer share of research benefits is the same as their share of costs of a levy, and their incentives are compatible with national interests. In such cases, a matching grant would cause an over-investment in research from a national perspective. However, if demand is less than perfectly elastic, and research causes a pivotal supply shift, the producer share of benefits is smaller than their share of costs of the levy, and they will under-invest in research from a national point of view. A matching grant can be justified in such cases, however the magnitude of the optimal grant is sensitive to market conditions. [source]