IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/agecon/v21y1999i3p231-239.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Redistribution of social benefits from advances in extension and research in the Tanzanian maize industry

Author

Listed:
  • Ephraim M. Nkonya
  • Joe L. Parcell

Abstract

This study determined consumer and producer welfare gains from advances in extension and research in the maize industry of Tanzania to determine how a national taxing schedule should be determined. It was found that, for an off‐farm marketable surplus of 40%, consumers and producers gain equally, while for an off‐farm marketable surplus of 60%, consumers realize 75% of the welfare benefits. This suggests that consumers and producers should share equally in a revenue generating tax for funding maize research and extension programs. However, for large producers with a marketable surplus of 60% or more, their tax should decrease proportionally to the amount sold. Alternatively, if taxed equally, large‐scale producers should receive some form of compensation through direct government payments.

Suggested Citation

  • Ephraim M. Nkonya & Joe L. Parcell, 1999. "Redistribution of social benefits from advances in extension and research in the Tanzanian maize industry," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 21(3), pages 231-239, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:bla:agecon:v:21:y:1999:i:3:p:231-239
    DOI: 10.1111/j.1574-0862.1999.tb00597.x
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1574-0862.1999.tb00597.x
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/j.1574-0862.1999.tb00597.x?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
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Norman, David W., 1991. "Farming Systems Research in a Declining Donor Environment," Staff Papers 118198, Kansas State University, Department of Agricultural Economics.
    2. Masakatsu Akino & Yujiro Hayami, 1975. "Efficiency and Equity in Public Research: Rice Breeding in Japan's Economic Development: Reply," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 57(4), pages 734-735.
    3. Prabhu L. Pingali & Mark W. Rosegrant, 1998. "Supplying Wheat for Asia's Increasingly Westernized Diets," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 80(5), pages 954-959.
    4. William A. Masters & Paul V. Preckel, 1997. "A Spatial Analysis of Maize Marketing Policy Reforms in Zambia," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 79(2), pages 514-523.
    5. Keith O. Fuglie, 1995. "Measuring Welfare Benefits from Improvements in Storage Technology with an Application to Tunisian Potatoes," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 77(1), pages 162-173.
    6. Harry W. Ayer & G. Edward Schuh, 1972. "Social Rates of Return and Other Aspects of Agricultural Research: The Case of Cotton Research in São Paulo, Brazil," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 54(4_Part_1), pages 557-569.
    7. Andrew Schmitz & David Seckler, 1970. "Mechanized Agriculture and Social Welfare: The Case of the Tomato Harvester," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 52(4), pages 569-577.
    8. Jere R. Behrman & Murty K. N., 1985. "Market Impacts of Technological Change for Sorghum in Indian Near-Subsistence Agriculture," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 67(3), pages 539-549.
    9. Greg Traxler & Derek Byerlee, 1992. "Economic Returns to Crop Management Research in a Post-Green Revolution Setting," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 74(3), pages 573-582.
    10. R. K. Lindner & F. G. Jarrett, 1978. "Supply Shifts and the Size of Research Benefits," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 60(1), pages 48-58.
    11. Masakatsu Akino & Yujiro Hayami, 1975. "Efficiency and Equity in Public Research: Rice Breeding in Japan's Economic Development," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 57(1), pages 1-10.
    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. Michael Harris & Alan Lloyd, 1991. "The Returns to Agricultural Research and the Underinvestment Hypothesis ‐ A Survey," Australian Economic Review, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne Institute of Applied Economic and Social Research, vol. 24(3), pages 16-27, July.
    2. E. Pasour & Marc Johnson, 1982. "Bureaucratic productivity: The case of agricultural research revisited," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 39(2), pages 301-317, January.
    3. Zhi Xu, 1994. "Assessing Distributional Impacts of Forest Policies and Projects," Evaluation Review, , vol. 18(3), pages 281-311, June.
    4. Vernon Ruttan, 1980. "Bureaucratic productivity: The case of agricultural research," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 35(5), pages 529-547, January.
    5. Rajeswari S., 1995. "Agricultural research effort: Conceptual clarity and measurement," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 23(4), pages 617-635, April.
    6. Renkow, Mitch, 2000. "Poverty, productivity and production environment:: a review of the evidence," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 25(4), pages 463-478, August.
    7. Fisher, Monica G. & Masters, William A. & Sidibe, Mamadou, 2000. "Technical change in Senegal's irrigated rice sector: impact assessment under uncertainty," Agricultural Economics, Blackwell, vol. 24(2), pages 179-197, January.
    8. Frisvold, George B. & Sullivan, John & Raneses, Anton, 2003. "Genetic improvements in major US crops: the size and distribution of benefits," Agricultural Economics, Blackwell, vol. 28(2), pages 109-119, March.
    9. Nagy, Joseph G., 1983. "Estimating the Yield Advantage of High Yielding Wheat Varieties: The Use of On-Farm Yield Constraints Data," Bulletins 8428, University of Minnesota, Economic Development Center.
    10. Zachariah, Oswald E. R. & Fox, Glenn & Brinkman, George L., 1988. "The Returns to Broiler Research in Canada: 1968 to 1984," Department of Agricultural Economics and Business 258611, University of Guelph.
    11. Kim, Yun-Shik & Sumner, Daniel A., 2005. "Measuring Research Benefits With Import Ban Restrictions, Quality Changes, Non-Market Influences On Adoption And Food Security Incentives," 2005 Annual meeting, July 24-27, Providence, RI 19148, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
    12. Vere, David T. & Sinden, Jack A. & Campbell, M.H., 1980. "Social Benefits of Serrated Tussock Control in New South Wales," Review of Marketing and Agricultural Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 56(03), pages 1-16, December.
    13. Edwards, Geoff W. & Freebairn, John W., 1982. "The Social Benefits from an Increase in Productivity in a Part of an Industry," Review of Marketing and Agricultural Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 50(02), pages 1-18, August.
    14. McVey, Marty Jay, 1996. "Valuing quality differentiated grains from a total logistics perspective," ISU General Staff Papers 1996010108000012326, Iowa State University, Department of Economics.
    15. Scobie, Grant M., 1976. "Who Benefits From Agricultural Research?," Review of Marketing and Agricultural Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 44(04), pages 1-6, December.
    16. Wilson, Clevo & Tisdell, Clem, 2001. "Why farmers continue to use pesticides despite environmental, health and sustainability costs," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 39(3), pages 449-462, December.
    17. C.S. Kim & C. Sandretto & N.D. Uri, 1997. "The Implications of the Adoption of Alternative Production Practices on the Estimation of Input Productivity in Agriculture," Energy & Environment, , vol. 8(2), pages 133-150, June.
    18. Norton, George W. & Davis, Jeffrey S., 1979. "Review Of Methods Used To Evaluate Returns To Agricultural Research," Staff Papers 13520, University of Minnesota, Department of Applied Economics.
    19. Williams, Gary W. & Shumway, C. Richard & Love, H. Alan, 2002. "Returns to Soybean Producers from Investments in Promotion and Research," Agricultural and Resource Economics Review, Northeastern Agricultural and Resource Economics Association, vol. 31(1), pages 1-15, April.
    20. Barkley, Andrew P. & Nalley, Lawton Lanier & Crespi, John M., 2008. "The Impact of the CIMMYT Wheat Breeding Program on Mexican Wheat Producers and Consumers: An Economic Welfare Analysis," 2008 Annual Meeting, February 2-6, 2008, Dallas, Texas 6931, Southern Agricultural Economics Association.

    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:bla:agecon:v:21:y:1999:i:3:p:231-239. 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://edirc.repec.org/data/iaaeeea.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.