Home  About us  Contact
 

Agricultural R&D (agricultural + r&d)

Distribution by Scientific Domains
Business, Economics, Finance and Accounting100%

Selected Abstracts

Public investment and regional inequality in rural China

AGRICULTURAL ECONOMICS, Issue 2 2004
Xiaobo Zhang
Public investment; Regional inequality; Growth; Chinese economy Abstract This paper develops a method for decomposing the contributions of various types of public investment to regional inequality and applies the method to rural China. Public investments are found to have contributed to production growth in both the agricultural and rural non-agricultural sectors, but their contributions to regional inequality have differed by type of investment and the region in which they are made. All types of investment in the least-developed western region reduce regional inequality, whereas additional investments in the coastal and central regions worsen regional inequality. Investments in rural education and agricultural R&D in the western region have the largest and most favorable impacts on reducing regional inequality. [source]

Attribution and other problems in assessing the returns to agricultural R&D

AGRICULTURAL ECONOMICS, Issue 2-3 2001
Julian M. Alston
Abstract Estimated rates of return to research are distorted by problems of attributing the credit for particular research results, or for particular research-induced productivity increases, among research expenditures undertaken at different times, in different places, and by different agencies. A comprehensive assessment of the evidence from past economic evaluations of the returns to agricultural R&D indicates that studies generally report high rates of return, with enormous variation among studies, but that much of this evidence has been tainted by inadequate attention to attribution problems. This paper raises these concerns in a general way and illustrates their importance with reference to two particular types of attribution problem. First, we consider the problem of accounting for locational spillovers in attributing varietal-improvement technology among research performers, using US wheat varieties as an example. Second, we consider the temporal aspects of the attribution problem using the specification of research lags in econometric models to illustrate the problem of attributing aggregate productivity gains to research expenditures made at different times. [source]

Short and long-run returns to agricultural R&D in South Africa, or will the real rate of return please stand up?

AGRICULTURAL ECONOMICS, Issue 1 2000
David Schimmelpfennig
Abstract This paper briefly presents the results of a total factor productivity (TFP) study of South African commercial agriculture, for 1947-1997, and illustrates some potential pitfalls in rate of return to research (ROR) calculations. The lag between R&D and TFP is analyzed and found to be only 9 years, with a pronounced negative skew, reflecting the adaptive focus of the South African system. The two-stage approach gives a massive ROR of 170%. The predetermined lag parameters are then used in modeling the knowledge stock, to refine the estimates of the ROR from short- and long-run dual profit functions. In the short run, with the capital inputs treated as fixed, the ROR is a more reasonable 44%. In the long run, with adjustment of the capital stocks, it rises to 113%, which would reflect the fact that new technology is embodied in the capital items. However, the long-run model raises a new problem since capital stock adjustment takes 11 years, 2 years longer than the lag between R&D and TFP. If this is assumed to be the correct lag, the ROR falls to 58%, a best estimate. The paper draws attention to the possible sensitivity of rate of return calculations to assumed lag structure, particularly when the lag between changes in R&D and TFP is skewed. [source]

Research returns redux: a meta-analysis of the returns to agricultural R&D

AUSTRALIAN JOURNAL OF AGRICULTURAL & RESOURCE ECONOMICS, Issue 2 2000
Julian M. Alston
A total of 289 studies of returns to agricultural R&D were compiled and these provide 1821 estimates of rates of return. After removing statistical outliers and incomplete observations, across the remaining 1128 observations the estimated annual rates of return averaged 65 per cent overall , 80 per cent for research only, 80 per cent for extension only, and 47 per cent for research and extension combined. These averages reveal little meaningful information from a large body of literature, which provides rate-of-return estimates that are often not directly comparable. This study was aimed at trying to account for the differences. Several features of the methods used by research evaluators matter, in particular assumptions about lag lengths and the nature of the research-induced supply shift. [source]