IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ags/umaesp/43094.html

Agricultural R&D Policy: A Tragedy of the International Commons

Author

Listed:
  • James, Jennifer S.
  • Pardey, Philip G.
  • Alston, Julian M.

Abstract

Over the past 50 years public agricultural research has contributed enormously to humanity, enabling the supply of food to grow faster than demand in spite of a rapidly growing population, income growth, and shrinking natural resources. Nonetheless, in many countries we see waning public support for agricultural R&D, especially in Africa, a diversion of research resources from farm productivity towards other agendas, and early warning signs of a slowdown in agricultural productivity. The world has continued to collectively underinvest in agricultural R&D because of domestic and international market failures associated with appropriability problems. Governments have failed to effectively address these problems, often doing too little, too late. This tragedy of the international commons may be getting worse. In the past, developing countries benefited considerably from technological spillovers from developed countries, but because of changes occurring in developed countries, spillovers from developed countries may not be available to developing countries in the same ways or to the same extent. In this article, the factors contributing to persistent global underinvestment in agricultural R&D are described from a developing-country perspective, estimates of agricultural R&D spending trends are presented, and incentive mechanisms for increasing rates of investment in agricultural R&D are described and assessed.

Suggested Citation

  • James, Jennifer S. & Pardey, Philip G. & Alston, Julian M., 2008. "Agricultural R&D Policy: A Tragedy of the International Commons," Staff Papers 43094, University of Minnesota, Department of Applied Economics.
  • Handle: RePEc:ags:umaesp:43094
    DOI: 10.22004/ag.econ.43094
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/43094/files/SP-IP-08-01.pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.22004/ag.econ.43094?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. Michele Boldrin & David Levine, 2002. "The Case Against Intellectual Property," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 92(2), pages 209-212, May.
    2. Josh Lerner & Jean Tirole, 2002. "Some Simple Economics of Open Source," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 50(2), pages 197-234, June.
    3. Masters, William J., 2003. "Research Prizes: A Mechanism To Reward Innovation In African Agriculture," 2003 Annual meeting, July 27-30, Montreal, Canada 22162, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
    4. Pardey, Philip G & Roseboom, Johannes & Craig, Barbara J, 1992. "A Yardstick for International Comparisons: An Application to National Agricultural Research Expenditures," Economic Development and Cultural Change, University of Chicago Press, vol. 40(2), pages 333-349, January.
    5. repec:wbk:wbpubs:28241 is not listed on IDEAS
    6. Tiffany Shih & Brian Wright, 2011. "Agricultural Innovation," NBER Chapters, in: Accelerating Energy Innovation: Insights from Multiple Sectors, pages 49-85, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    7. Srinivasan, Chittur S., 2005. "The International Trends in Plant Variety Protection," eJADE: electronic Journal of Agricultural and Development Economics, Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO), Agricultural and Development Economics Division (ESA), vol. 2(2), pages 1-38.
    8. repec:wbk:wbpubs:11855 is not listed on IDEAS
    9. Alston, Julian M. & Freebairn, John W. & James, Jennifer S., 2004. "Levy-funded research choices by producers and society," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 48(01), pages 1-32.
    10. Carlson, Gerald A. & Zilberman, David & Miranowski, John, 1993. "Agricultural and Resource Economics," Staff General Research Papers Archive 11104, Iowa State University, Department of Economics.
    11. repec:wbk:wbpubs:8150 is not listed on IDEAS
    12. Kremer, Michael & Zwane, Alix Peterson, 2005. "Encouraging Private Sector Research for Tropical Agriculture," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 33(1), pages 87-105, January.
    13. Pardey, Philip G. & Beintema, Nienke M. & Dehmer, Steven & Wood, Stanley, 2006. "Agricultural research: a growing global divide?," Food Policy Reports 55647, CGIAR, International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI).
    14. Bonwoo Koo & Philip G. Pardey & Keming Qian & Yi Zhang, 2006. "An option perspective on generating and maintaining plant variety rights in China," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 35(1), pages 35-48, July.
    15. Josh Lerner & Jean Tirole, 2005. "The Economics of Technology Sharing: Open Source and Beyond," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 19(2), pages 99-120, Spring.
    16. Beintema, Nienke M. & Stads, Gert-Jan, 2004. "Investing in Sub-Saharan African agricultural research," Issue briefs 24, International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI).
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Jules-Daniel Wurlod & Derek Eaton, 2015. "Chasing After the Frontier in Agricultural Productivity," FOODSECURE Working papers 36, LEI Wageningen UR.
    2. Wei-Ming Tian & Zhang-Yue Zhou, 2011. "Fluctuations of Prices in the World Grain Market: Policy Responses by the Chinese Government," Chapters, in: Lilai Xu (ed.), China’s Economy in the Post-WTO Environment, chapter 8, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    3. Esposti, Roberto, . "Knowledge, Technology and Innovations for a Bio-based Economy: Lessons from the Past, Challenges for the Future," Bio-based and Applied Economics Journal, Italian Association of Agricultural and Applied Economics (AIEAA), vol. 1(3), pages 1-34.
    4. 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.
    5. Pooja Sharma & Ashok Gulati, 2015. "Approaches to Food Security in Brazil, China, India, Malaysia, Mexico, and Nigeria: Lessons for Developing Countries," Working Papers id:6427, eSocialSciences.
    6. Pedro Andres Garzon Delvaux & Heinrich Hockmann & Peter Voigt & Pavel Ciaian & Sergio Gomez y Paloma, 2018. "The impact of private R&D on the performance of food-processing firms: Evidence from Europe, Japan and North America," JRC Research Reports JRC104144, Joint Research Centre.
    7. Pooja Sharma & Ashok Gulati, 2012. "Approaches to Food Security in Brazil, China, India, Malaysia, Mexico and Nigeria: Lessons for Developing Countries," Working Papers id:4930, eSocialSciences.
    8. Ricardo de Avillez, 2011. "A Detailed Analysis of the Productivity Performance of the Canadian Primary Agriculture Sector," CSLS Research Reports 2011-06, Centre for the Study of Living Standards.

    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. Wright, Brian D. & Pardey, Philip G. & Nottenburg, Carol & Koo, Bonwoo, 2007. "Agricultural Innovation: Investments and Incentives," Handbook of Agricultural Economics, in: Robert Evenson & Prabhu Pingali (ed.), Handbook of Agricultural Economics, edition 1, volume 3, chapter 48, pages 2533-2603, Elsevier.
    2. 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.
    3. Pardey, Philip G. & James, Jennifer S. & Alston, Julian M. & Wood, Stanley & Koo, Bonwoo & Binenbaum, Eran & Hurley, Terrance M. & Glewwe, Paul & Mayer, Jorge & Jones, Richard & De Groote, Hugo & Kana, 2007. "Science, Technology and Skills," Reports 136256, University of Minnesota, International Science and Technology Practice and Policy.
    4. Faye, Issa & Deininger, Klaus W., 2005. "Do new delivery systems improve extension access? Evidence from rural Uganda," 2005 Annual meeting, July 24-27, Providence, RI 19405, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
    5. Anwar Naseem & David J. Spielman & Steven Were Omamo, 2010. "Private-sector investment in R&D: a review of policy options to promote its growth in developing-country agriculture," Agribusiness, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 26(1), pages 143-173.
    6. Guido Cozzi, 2009. "Intellectual Property, Innovation, And Growth: Introduction To The Special Issue," Scottish Journal of Political Economy, Scottish Economic Society, vol. 56(4), pages 383-389, September.
    7. David, Paul A. & Shapiro, Joseph S., 2008. "Community-based production of open-source software: What do we know about the developers who participate?," Information Economics and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 20(4), pages 364-398, December.
    8. Charles Ayoubi & Boris Thurm, 2023. "Knowledge diffusion and morality: Why do we freely share valuable information with Strangers?," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 32(1), pages 75-99, January.
    9. Douglas Kiarelly Godoy de Araujo, 2025. "Open-sourced central bank macroeconomic models," IFC Bulletins chapters, in: Bank for International Settlements (ed.), Data science in central banking: enhancing the access to and sharing of data, volume 64, Bank for International Settlements.
    10. Michiel Bijlsma & Paul de Bijl & Viktoria Kocsis, 2009. "Concurrentie, innovatie en intellectuele eigendomsrechten in software markten," CPB Document 181, CPB Netherlands Bureau for Economic Policy Analysis.
    11. Burcu Tan & Edward G. Anderson, Jr. & Geoffrey G. Parker, 2020. "Platform Pricing and Investment to Drive Third-Party Value Creation in Two-Sided Networks," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 31(1), pages 217-239, March.
    12. A. Yalta & A. Yalta, 2010. "Should Economists Use Open Source Software for Doing Research?," Computational Economics, Springer;Society for Computational Economics, vol. 35(4), pages 371-394, April.
    13. Nicholas Economides & Evangelos Katsamakas, 2005. "Linux vs. Windows: A comparison of application and platform innovation incentives for open source and proprietary software platforms+," Working Papers 05-03, NET Institute, revised Sep 2005.
    14. Caulkins, Jonathan P. & Feichtinger, Gustav & Grass, Dieter & Hartl, Richard F. & Kort, Peter M. & Seidl, Andrea, 2013. "When to make proprietary software open source," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 37(6), pages 1182-1194.
    15. Boris van Leeuwen & Theo Offerman & Arthur Schram, 2020. "Competition for Status Creates Superstars: an Experiment on Public Good Provision and Network Formation," Journal of the European Economic Association, European Economic Association, vol. 18(2), pages 666-707.
    16. Dongryul Lee & Byung Kim, 2013. "Motivations for Open Source Project Participation and Decisions of Software Developers," Computational Economics, Springer;Society for Computational Economics, vol. 41(1), pages 31-57, January.
    17. Stads, Gert-Jan & Beintema, Nienke M., 2008. "Measuring agricultural research investments: A revised global picture," ASTI synthesis reports 127585, International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI).
    18. Paul Oldham & Stephen Hall & Oscar Forero, 2013. "Biological Diversity in the Patent System," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 8(11), pages 1-16, November.
    19. Olivier Toubia & Andrew T. Stephen, 2013. "Intrinsic vs. Image-Related Utility in Social Media: Why Do People Contribute Content to Twitter?," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 32(3), pages 368-392, May.
    20. Robert M. Sauer, 2007. "Why develop open-source software? The role of non-pecuniary benefits, monetary rewards, and open-source licence type," Oxford Review of Economic Policy, Oxford University Press and Oxford Review of Economic Policy Limited, vol. 23(4), pages 605-619, Winter.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:ags:umaesp:43094. 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: AgEcon Search (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/daumnus.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.