IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/ajagec/v47y1965i2p234-241..html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Geographic Distribution of Research Costs and Benefits

Author

Listed:
  • Robert Latimer
  • Don Paarlberg

Abstract

More interest is being taken in the sources of increased agricultural productivity. Public efforts to produce and disseminate new knowledge in agriculture have been increasing particularly since World War II. But there are wide differences in the contributions among the states. This article grew out of a study of the sources of income for agricultural research and education, which attempted to determine if state differences in the public production and distribution of new technology affected the average productivity of farms among the states. The methods of multiple correlation of gross farm income with conventional inputs and inputs of agricultural research education did not disclose any significant differences among states in output attributable to the latter two inputs. The conclusion is that public information is so freely available and so generally applicable that the source of the new knowledge is not very important when all the states in the Union are considered.

Suggested Citation

  • Robert Latimer & Don Paarlberg, 1965. "Geographic Distribution of Research Costs and Benefits," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 47(2), pages 234-241.
    • Handle: RePEc:oup:ajagec:v:47:y:1965:i:2:p:234-241.
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.2307/1236571
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Rausser, Gordon C. & de Janvry, Alain & Schmitz, Andrew & Zilberman, David D., 1980. "Principal issues in the evaluation of public research in agriculture," Department of Agricultural & Resource Economics, UC Berkeley, Working Paper Series qt74v9m7dh, Department of Agricultural & Resource Economics, UC Berkeley.
    2. David N. Bengston, 1985. "Economic Evaluation of Agricultural Research," Evaluation Review, , vol. 9(3), pages 243-262, June.
    3. Alejandro Plastina & Lilyan Fulginiti, 2012. "Rates of return to public agricultural research in 48 US states," Journal of Productivity Analysis, Springer, vol. 37(2), pages 95-113, April.
    4. Evenson, Robert E., 1969. "Economic Aspects Of The Organization Of Agricultural Research," Staff Papers 13691, University of Minnesota, Department of Applied Economics.
    5. Leiby, James D. & Adams, Gregory D., 1991. "The Returns To Agricultural Research In Maine: The Case Of A Small Northeastern Experiment Station," Northeastern Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Northeastern Agricultural and Resource Economics Association, vol. 20(1), pages 1-14, April.
    6. Peterson, Willis L. & Hayami, Yujiro, 1977. "Technical Change in Agriculture," A Survey of Agricultural Economics Literature, Volume 1: Traditional Fields of Agricultural Economics 1940s to 1970s,, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    7. E. Pasour & Marc Johnson, 1982. "Bureaucratic productivity: The case of agricultural research revisited," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 39(2), pages 301-317, January.
    8. de Veer, Jan, 1970. "The Economic Evaluation of Research in the Agricultural Sciences and of Extension Work," 1970 Conference, August 23-September 2, 1970, Minsk, U.S.S.R. 209829, International Association of Agricultural Economists.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:oup:ajagec:v:47:y:1965:i:2:p:234-241.. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Oxford University Press (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/aaeaaea.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.