IDEAS home Printed from
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Are Basic Science And Biotechnology Complementary Activities?


  • Xia, Yin
  • Buccola, Steven T.


Enhancing agricultural productivity depends greatly on the management of information flows between basic and applied research. A framework is developed to examine the mutual relationship between molecular biological research and agricultural biotechnology innovations. Preliminary results provide a basis for university decision-making in both the short and long run.

Suggested Citation

  • Xia, Yin & Buccola, Steven T., 2001. "Are Basic Science And Biotechnology Complementary Activities?," 2001 Annual meeting, August 5-8, Chicago, IL 20575, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
  • Handle: RePEc:ags:aaea01:20575

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL:
    Download Restriction: no

    References listed on IDEAS

    1. Rebecca Henderson & Adam B. Jaffe & Manuel Trajtenberg, 1998. "Universities As A Source Of Commercial Technology: A Detailed Analysis Of University Patenting, 1965-1988," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 80(1), pages 119-127, February.
    2. Giancarlo Moschini & Harvey Lapan, 1997. "Intellectual Property Rights and the Welfare Effects of Agricultural R&D," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 79(4), pages 1229-1242.
    3. Lynne G. Zucker & Michael R. Darby, 1995. "Virtuous Circles of Productivity: Star Bioscientists and the Institutional Transformation of Industry," NBER Working Papers 5342, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    4. Aghion, Philippe & Howitt, Peter, 1992. "A Model of Growth through Creative Destruction," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 60(2), pages 323-351, March.
    5. James F. Oehmke & Dave D. Weatherspoon & Christopher A. Wolf & Anwar Naseem & Mywish Maredia & Amie Hightower, 2000. "Is agricultural research still a public good?," Agribusiness, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 16(1), pages 68-81.
    6. Segerstrom, Paul S & Anant, T C A & Dinopoulos, Elias, 1990. "A Schumpeterian Model of the Product Life Cycle," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 80(5), pages 1077-1091, December.
    7. Iain Cockburn & Rebecca Henderson & Scott Stern, 1999. "Balancing Incentives: The Tension Between Basic and Applied Research," NBER Working Papers 6882, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    8. Gordon Rausser, 1999. "Private/Public Research: Knowledge Assets and Future Scenarios," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 81(5), pages 1011-1027.
    9. Manuel Trajtenberg & Rebecca Henderson & Adam Jaffe, 1997. "University Versus Corporate Patents: A Window On The Basicness Of Invention," Economics of Innovation and New Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 5(1), pages 19-50.
    10. Khanna, Jyoti & Huffman, Wallace E & Sandler, Todd, 1994. "Agricultural Research Expenditures in the United States: A Public Goods Perspective," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 76(2), pages 267-277, May.
    11. Dietmar Harhoff & Francis Narin & F. M. Scherer & Katrin Vopel, 1999. "Citation Frequency And The Value Of Patented Inventions," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 81(3), pages 511-515, August.
    12. Narin, Francis & Hamilton, Kimberly S. & Olivastro, Dominic, 1997. "The increasing linkage between U.S. technology and public science," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 26(3), pages 317-330, October.
    13. Zilberman, David & Yarkin, Cherisa & Heiman, Amir, 1997. "Agricultural Biotechnology: Economic and International Implications," 1997 Conference, August 10-16, 1997, Sacramento, California 197037, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    14. Richard R. Nelson, 1959. "The Simple Economics of Basic Scientific Research," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 67, pages 297-297.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)


    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:ags:aaea01:20575. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (AgEcon Search). General contact details of provider: .

    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 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.

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

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.