IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/agribz/v6y1990i3p191-207.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Trends and composition of private food and agricultural R & D expenditures in the United States

Author

Listed:
  • Carl E. Pray

    (Department of Agricultural Economics and Marketing, Rutgers University, Cook College, New Brunswick, New Jersey)

  • Catherine Neumeyer

    (Department of Agricultural Economics and Marketing, Rutgers University, Cook College, New Brunswick, New Jersey)

Abstract

This article presents new data on the level and trends in private sector R & D on food, agriculture, and agricultural inputs. Private food and agricultural R & D grew about 4.6% annually between 1960 and 1986. The growth rate went down to 3.8% between 1980 and 1986. Much of the decline was accounted for by the decline in agricultural machinery R & D. Research divided by sales increased during the 1980s, indicating that the slowdown in R & D growth was due to the slowdown in sales rather than mergers or decreasing productivity of R & D.

Suggested Citation

  • Carl E. Pray & Catherine Neumeyer, 1990. "Trends and composition of private food and agricultural R & D expenditures in the United States," Agribusiness, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 6(3), pages 191-207.
    • Handle: RePEc:wly:agribz:v:6:y:1990:i:3:p:191-207
    DOI: 10.1002/1520-6297(199005)6:3<191::AID-AGR2720060303>3.0.CO;2-O
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    To our knowledge, this item is not available for download. To find whether it is available, there are three options:
    1. Check below whether another version of this item is available online.
    2. Check on the provider's web page whether it is in fact available.
    3. Perform a search for a similarly titled item that would be available.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. E. Pasour & Marc Johnson, 1982. "Bureaucratic productivity: The case of agricultural research revisited," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 39(2), pages 301-317, January.
    2. Farrell E. Jensen & C. Arden Pope, 1987. "The changing structure of US agriculture and implications for research in agribusiness firms," Agribusiness, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 3(2), pages 139-150.
    3. Zvi Griliches, 1984. "R&D, Patents, and Productivity," NBER Books, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc, number gril84-1.
    4. Frederic Scherer, 1984. "Using Linked Patent and R&D Data to Measure Interindustry Technology Flows," NBER Chapters, in: R&D, Patents, and Productivity, pages 417-464, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    5. Vernon Ruttan, 1980. "Bureaucratic productivity: The case of agricultural research," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 35(5), pages 529-547, January.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Hall, Bronwyn H. & Mairesse, Jacques & Mohnen, Pierre, 2010. "Measuring the Returns to R&D," Handbook of the Economics of Innovation, in: Bronwyn H. Hall & Nathan Rosenberg (ed.), Handbook of the Economics of Innovation, edition 1, volume 2, chapter 0, pages 1033-1082, Elsevier.
    2. G Cameron, 1996. "Innovation and Economic Growth," CEP Discussion Papers dp0277, Centre for Economic Performance, LSE.
    3. Gernot Hutschenreiter & Serguei Kaniovski, 1999. "Embodied Technology Diffusion in the Austrian Economy," WIFO Studies, WIFO, number 7711.
    4. Wang, L. & Szirmai, A.S., 2003. "Technological Inputs and Productivity Growth in China�s High-Tech Industries," Working Papers 03.27, Eindhoven Center for Innovation Studies.
    5. Cloodt, Myriam & Hagedoorn, John & Van Kranenburg, Hans, 2006. "Mergers and acquisitions: Their effect on the innovative performance of companies in high-tech industries," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(5), pages 642-654, June.
    6. Keller, Wolfgang, 2002. "Trade and the Transmission of Technology," Journal of Economic Growth, Springer, vol. 7(1), pages 5-24, March.
    7. Steven G. Allen, 1987. "Productivity Levels and Productivity Change Under Unionism," NBER Working Papers 2304, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    8. Araji, A. A. & White, F. C., 1991. "The Economic Impact Of Technological Change On U.S. Agriculture," A.E. Research Series 305084, University of Idaho, Department of Agricultural Economics and Rural Sociology.
    9. David H. Good & M. Ishaq Nadiri & Robin C. Sickles, 1996. "Index Number and Factor Demand Approaches to the Estimation of Productivity," NBER Working Papers 5790, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    10. M. Ishaq Nadiri, 1993. "Innovations and Technological Spillovers," NBER Working Papers 4423, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    11. Giovanni Peri, 2004. "Knowledge Flows and Productivity," Rivista di Politica Economica, SIPI Spa, vol. 94(2), pages 21-59, March-Apr.
    12. Robert Wieser, 2001. "R&D and Productivity: Empirical Evidence at the Firm Level," WIFO Working Papers 158, WIFO.
    13. Klenow, Peter J., 1996. "Industry innovation: where and why," Carnegie-Rochester Conference Series on Public Policy, Elsevier, vol. 44(1), pages 125-150, June.
    14. Gernot Hutschenreiter & Serguei Kaniovski, 1999. "Technologieströme in der österreichischen Wirtschaft," WIFO Monatsberichte (monthly reports), WIFO, vol. 72(6), pages 419-433, June.
    15. John Shea, 1999. "What Do Technology Shocks Do?," NBER Chapters, in: NBER Macroeconomics Annual 1998, volume 13, pages 275-322, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    16. Jun Koo, 2006. "In Search of New Knowledge: Its Origins and Destinations," Economic Development Quarterly, , vol. 20(3), pages 259-277, August.
    17. James Bessen & Robert M. Hunt, 2007. "An Empirical Look at Software Patents," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 16(1), pages 157-189, March.
    18. Daniel J. Wilson, 2002. "Is Embodied Technology the Result of Upstream R&D? Industry-Level Evidence," Review of Economic Dynamics, Elsevier for the Society for Economic Dynamics, vol. 5(2), pages 285-317, April.
    19. Fox, Glenn, 1985. "Social Rates Of Return To Public Investment In Agricultural Research And The Underinvestment Hypothesis: An Agnostic View," Staff Papers 14054, University of Minnesota, Department of Applied Economics.
    20. Hala Abou-Ali & Mohammed Belhaj, 2008. "Cost Benefit Analysis of Desert Locusts Control: A Multicountry Perspective," Working Papers 801, Economic Research Forum, revised 01 Jan 2008.

    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:wly:agribz:v:6:y:1990:i:3:p:191-207. 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.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with 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: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/journal/10.1002/(ISSN)1520-6297 .

    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.