IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/apecpp/v46y2024i1p76-94.html

The distribution of competitive research grants from the National Institute for Food and Agriculture: A comparison of 1862 land grant universities, 1890 land grant universities, and other institutions

Author

Listed:
  • Norbert L. W. Wilson
  • Lurleen M. Walters
  • Tara Wade
  • Kenesha Reynolds

Abstract

This article evaluates the U.S. Department of Agriculture, National Institute for Food and Agriculture (NIFA) competitive grant funding awarded to predominately White 1862 land grant institutions (LGUs), historically Black 1890 LGUs, and non‐land grant institutions. We present the historical distribution of funding for agricultural research. Much of the inquiry centers on the differential funding of the 1862 LGUs, 1890 LGUs, and non‐land grant institutions. We discuss the implications for academic and community stakeholders. Results show that, on average, 1890 LGUs and non‐land grant institutions receive less competitive grant funding than 1862 LGUs for the same award programs. We show that the disparity falls from 2010 to 2019.

Suggested Citation

  • Norbert L. W. Wilson & Lurleen M. Walters & Tara Wade & Kenesha Reynolds, 2024. "The distribution of competitive research grants from the National Institute for Food and Agriculture: A comparison of 1862 land grant universities, 1890 land grant universities, and other institutions," Applied Economic Perspectives and Policy, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 46(1), pages 76-94, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:wly:apecpp:v:46:y:2024:i:1:p:76-94
    DOI: 10.1002/aepp.13413
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1002/aepp.13413
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1002/aepp.13413?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Donna K Ginther & Jodi Basner & Unni Jensen & Joshua Schnell & Raynard Kington & Walter T Schaffer, 2018. "Publications as predictors of racial and ethnic differences in NIH research awards," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 13(11), pages 1-24, November.
    2. James F. Oehmke, 2017. "Re-Examining the Reported Rates of Return to Food and Agricultural Research and Development: Comment," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 99(3), pages 818-826.
    3. James F. Oehmke, 2017. "Re‐Examining the Reported Rates of Return to Food and Agricultural Research and Development: Comment," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 99(3), pages 818-826, April.
    4. Wallace E. Huffman & Robert E. Evenson, 2006. "Do Formula or Competitive Grant Funds Have Greater Impacts on State Agricultural Productivity?," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 88(4), pages 783-798.
    5. Huffman, Wallace E. & Norton, George W. & Traxler, Greg & Frisvold, George B. & Foltz, Jeremy D., 2006. "Winners and Losers: Formula versus Competitive Funding of Agricultural Research," Choices: The Magazine of Food, Farm, and Resource Issues, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 21(4), pages 1-6.
    6. Ayoubi, Charles & Pezzoni, Michele & Visentin, Fabiana, 2019. "The important thing is not to win, it is to take part: What if scientists benefit from participating in research grant competitions?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(1), pages 84-97.
    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. Andersen, Matthew A., . "Knowledge productivity and the returns to agricultural research: a review," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 63(2).
    2. Xudong Rao & Terrance M. Hurley & Philip G. Pardey, 2020. "Recalibrating the reported returns to agricultural R&D: what if we all heeded Griliches?," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 64(3), pages 977-1001, July.
    3. Esposti, Roberto & Materia, Valentina, 2015. "The determinants of the public R&D cofinancing rate An empirical assessment on agricultural research," 2015 Conference, August 9-14, 2015, Milan, Italy 211624, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    4. Sparger, John Adam & Norton, George W. & Heisey, Paul W. & Alwang, Jeffrey, 2013. "Is the share of agricultural maintenance research rising in the United States?," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(C), pages 126-135.
    5. Norbert L. W. Wilson & Natalie Hochhaus, 2024. "Have agricultural and applied economists lost sight of the land‐grant mission? A textual analysis of Presidential Addresses and Invited Papers from 1919–2022," Applied Economic Perspectives and Policy, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 46(3), pages 845-864, September.
    6. Hren, Darko & Pina, David G. & Norman, Christopher R. & Marušić, Ana, 2022. "What makes or breaks competitive research proposals? A mixed-methods analysis of research grant evaluation reports," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 16(2).
    7. Shanchao Wang & Julian M. Alston & Philip G. Pardey, 2025. "R&D lags in economic models," Economics of Innovation and New Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 34(6), pages 842-862, August.
    8. Giada Baldessarelli & Nathalie Lazaric & Michele Pezzoni, 2022. "Organizational routines: Evolution in the research landscape of two core communities," Journal of Evolutionary Economics, Springer, vol. 32(4), pages 1119-1154, September.
    9. Sarah Shandera & Jes L Matsick & David R Hunter & Louis Leblond, 2021. "RASE: Modeling cumulative disadvantage due to marginalized group status in academia," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 16(12), pages 1-20, December.
    10. Pardey, Philip G. & Alston, Julian M. & Ruttan, Vernon W., 2010. "The Economics of Innovation and Technical Change in Agriculture," 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 939-984, Elsevier.
    11. repec:ags:phajad:199094 is not listed on IDEAS
    12. Marco Cozzi, 2020. "Public Funding of Research and Grant Proposals in the Social Sciences: Empirical Evidence from Canada," Department Discussion Papers 1809, Department of Economics, University of Victoria.
    13. Ginther, Donna K. & Heggeness, Misty L., 2020. "Administrative discretion in scientific funding: Evidence from a prestigious postdoctoral training program✰," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 49(4).
    14. Katrin Hussinger & João N. Carvalho, 2022. "The long-term effect of research grants on the scientific output of university professors," Industry and Innovation, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 29(4), pages 463-487, April.
    15. Jacqueline N. Lane & Ina Ganguli & Patrick Gaule & Eva Guinan & Karim R. Lakhani, 2021. "Engineering serendipity: When does knowledge sharing lead to knowledge production?," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 42(6), pages 1215-1244, June.
    16. Ying Cao & Zhixiong Fan & Weiqiang Chen & Zhijian Cao & Anyin Jiang, 2024. "Climate Change, Biased Technological Advances and Agricultural TFP: Empirical Evidence from China," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 14(8), pages 1-19, July.
    17. Lawson, Cornelia & Salter, Ammon, 2023. "Exploring the effect of overlapping institutional applications on panel decision-making," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 52(9).
    18. Kyle R. Myers, 2022. "Some Tradeoffs of Competition in Grant Contests," Papers 2207.02379, arXiv.org, revised Mar 2024.
    19. Conor O’Kane & Jing A. Zhang & Jarrod Haar & James A. Cunningham, 2023. "How scientists interpret and address funding criteria: value creation and undesirable side effects," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 61(2), pages 799-826, August.
    20. Elizabeth Webster & Alfons Palangkaraya & Paul H. Jensen & Russell Thomson, 2024. "The effects of university-industry collaboration subsidies on firm performance," Melbourne Institute Working Paper Series wp2024n14, Melbourne Institute of Applied Economic and Social Research, The University of Melbourne.
    21. Binenbaum, Eran & Mullen, John D. & Wang, Chang Tao, 2008. "Has the Return on Australian Public Investment in Agricultural Research Changed?," 2008 Conference (52nd), February 5-8, 2008, Canberra, Australia 6016, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society.

    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:apecpp:v:46:y:2024:i:1:p:76-94. 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: https://doi.org/10.1002/(ISSN)2040-5804 .

    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.