IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/fpr/eptddp/38.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Research returns redux: a meta-analysis of the returns to agricultural R&D

Author

Listed:
  • Alston, Julian M.
  • Marra, Michele C.
  • Pardey, Philip G.
  • Wyatt, T. J.

Abstract

A total of 294 studies of returns to agricultural R&D (including extension) were compiled and these studies provide 1,858 separate estimates of rates of return. This includes some extreme values, which are implausible. When the highest and lowest 2.5 percent of the rates of return were set aside, the estimated annual rates of return averaged 73 percent overall–88 percent for research only, 45 percent for research and extension, and 79 percent for extension only. But these averages reveal little meaningful information from a large and diverse body of literature, which provides rate-of-return estimates that are often not directly comparable. The purpose of this study was to go behind the averages, and try to account for the sources of differences, in a meta-analysis of the studies of returns to agricultural R&D. The results conform with the theory and prior beliefs in many ways. Several features of the methods used by research evaluators matter, in particular assumptions about lag lengths and the nature of the research-induced supply shift.

Suggested Citation

  • Alston, Julian M. & Marra, Michele C. & Pardey, Philip G. & Wyatt, T. J., 1998. "Research returns redux: a meta-analysis of the returns to agricultural R&D," EPTD discussion papers 38, International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI).
  • Handle: RePEc:fpr:eptddp:38
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.ifpri.org/sites/default/files/publications/eptdp38.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Julian M. Alston & Philip G. Pardey & Jennifer S. James & Matthew A. Anderson, 2009. "The Economics of Agricultural R&D," Annual Review of Resource Economics, Annual Reviews, vol. 1(1), pages 537-566, September.
    2. Smith, V. Kerry & Osborne, Laura L., 1996. "Do Contingent Valuation Estimates Pass a "Scope" Test? A Meta-analysis," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 31(3), pages 287-301, November.
    3. Fullerton, Don, 1991. "Reconciling Recent Estimates of the Marginal Welfare Cost of Taxation," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 81(1), pages 302-308, March.
    4. P. G. Lakshminarayan & P W. Gassman & A. Bouzaher & R. C. Izaurralde, 1996. "A Metamodeling Approach to Evaluate Agricultural Policy Impact on Soil Degradation in Western Canada," Canadian Journal of Agricultural Economics/Revue canadienne d'agroeconomie, Canadian Agricultural Economics Society/Societe canadienne d'agroeconomie, vol. 44(3), pages 277-294, November.
    5. Kevin J. Boyle & Gregory L. Poe & John C. Bergstrom, 1994. "What Do We Know About Groundwater Values? Preliminary Implications from a Meta Analysis of Contingent-Valuation Studies," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 76(5), pages 1055-1061.
    6. Charles L. Ballard & Don Fullerton, 1992. "Distortionary Taxes and the Provision of Public Goods," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 6(3), pages 117-131, Summer.
    7. Alston, Julian M. & Craig, Barbara J. & Pardey, Philip G., 1998. "Dynamics in the creation and depreciation of knowledge, and the returns to research:," EPTD discussion papers 35, International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI).
    8. E. Pasour & Marc Johnson, 1982. "Bureaucratic productivity: The case of agricultural research revisited," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 39(2), pages 301-317, 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. Alston, Julian M. & Wyatt, T. J. & Pardey, Philip G. & Marra, Michele C. & Chan-Kang, Connie, 2000. "A meta-analysis of rates of return to agricultural R & D: ex pede Herculem?," Research reports 113, International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI).
    2. Philip G. Pardey & Julian M. Alston & Connie Chan-Kang & Eduardo C. Magalhães & Stephen A. Vosti, 2006. "International and Institutional R&D Spillovers: Attribution of Benefits among Sources for Brazil's New Crop Varieties," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 88(1), pages 104-123.
    3. Alston, Julian M. & Pardey, Philip G., 2001. "Attribution and other problems in assessing the returns to agricultural R&D," Agricultural Economics, Blackwell, vol. 25(2-3), pages 141-152, September.
    4. Harvey, David R., 2003. "Policy Dependency And Reform: Economic Gains Versus Political Pains," 2003 Annual Meeting, August 16-22, 2003, Durban, South Africa 25865, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    5. Ming Chung Chang & Shufen Wu, 2011. "Should Marginal Cost of Public Funds include the Revenue Effect?," Swiss Journal of Economics and Statistics (SJES), Swiss Society of Economics and Statistics (SSES), vol. 147(I), pages 1-16, March.
    6. James E. Anderson & Will Martin, 2011. "Costs of Taxation and Benefits of Public Goods with Multiple Taxes and Goods," Journal of Public Economic Theory, Association for Public Economic Theory, vol. 13(2), pages 289-309, April.
    7. Parry, Ian W.H., 1999. "Tax Deductions, Consumption Distortions, and the Marginal Excess Burden of Taxation," Discussion Papers 10801, Resources for the Future.
    8. Erwin Bulte & G. van Kooten, 1999. "Marginal Valuation of Charismatic Species: Implications for Conservation," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 14(1), pages 119-130, July.
    9. Edwards, Jeremy & Keen, Michael, 1996. "Tax competition and Leviathan," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 40(1), pages 113-134, January.
    10. Skinner, Jonathan, 1996. "The dynamic efficiency cost of not taxing housing," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 59(3), pages 397-417, March.
    11. Kaplow, Louis, 2006. "Public goods and the distribution of income," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 50(7), pages 1627-1660, October.
    12. Will Martin & James E. Anderson, 2005. "Costs of Taxation and the Benefits of Public Goods: The Role of Income Effects," Boston College Working Papers in Economics 617, Boston College Department of Economics.
    13. Shuang Liu & David I Stern, 2008. "A Meta-Analysis of Contingent Valuation Studies in Coastal and Near-Shore Marine Ecosystems," Socio-Economics and the Environment in Discussion (SEED) Working Paper Series 2008-15, CSIRO Sustainable Ecosystems.
    14. Ming Chung Chang & Hsiao‐Ping Peng, 2009. "Structure Regulation, Price Structure, Cross‐Subsidization And Marginal Cost Of Public Funds," Manchester School, University of Manchester, vol. 77(6), pages 675-698, December.
    15. Chris Jones, 2005. "Why the Marginal Social Cost of Funds is not the Shadow Value of Government Revenue," ANU Working Papers in Economics and Econometrics 2005-449, Australian National University, College of Business and Economics, School of Economics.
    16. Salhofer, K., 1996. "Efficient income redistribution for a small country using optimal combined instruments," Agricultural Economics, Blackwell, vol. 13(3), pages 191-199, February.
    17. Gardner, Bruce L., 1997. "Returns to Policy-Related Social Science Research in Agriculture," Working Papers 197845, University of Maryland, Department of Agricultural and Resource Economics.
    18. Liqun Liu, 2004. "The Marginal Cost of Funds and the Shadow Prices of Public Sector Inputs and Outputs," International Tax and Public Finance, Springer;International Institute of Public Finance, vol. 11(1), pages 17-29, January.
    19. 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.
    20. Giannakas, Konstantinos, 2001. "The economics of intellectual property rights under imperfect enforcement: developing countries, biotechnology, and the TRIPs agreement," EPTD discussion papers 80, International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI).

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Rate of return.; Agricultural research.;

    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:fpr:eptddp:38. 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: (). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/ifprius.html .

    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.