IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/cup/jagaec/v33y2001i02p327-339_00.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Are American Farmers Better Off as a Result of Technology Gains?

Author

Listed:
  • Debertin, David L.

Abstract

Commercial farmers remain a primary political force in support of publicly-supported research and educational programs to create productivity gains in crop and livestock production. Have the technical productivity gains brought about by both public and private sector research and educational efforts improved the well being of American farmers? A great number of agricultural scientists believe that they have. Studies have attempted to provide estimates of the internal rate of return and benefit/cost ratios for agricultural research and education. The vast majority of these studies estimate a quite favorable internal rate of return and a high productivity for public-sector agricultural research (Huffman and Just, p. 828). But these studies have focused on rates of return to agricultural research and education for society as a whole, without attempting to determine if these gains accrued to farmers, consumers, or perhaps the agribusiness firms who purchase raw farm commodities from farmers or sell them inputs.

Suggested Citation

  • Debertin, David L., 2001. "Are American Farmers Better Off as a Result of Technology Gains?," Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 33(2), pages 327-339, August.
    • Handle: RePEc:cup:jagaec:v:33:y:2001:i:02:p:327-339_00
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.cambridge.org/core/product/identifier/S1074070800005782/type/journal_article
    File Function: link to article abstract page
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Schuh, G. Edward, 1986. "Revitalizing Land Grant Universities: It's Time To Regain Relevance," Choices: The Magazine of Food, Farm, and Resource Issues, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 1(2), pages 1-5.
    2. Wallace E. Huffman & Richard E. Just, 2000. "Setting Efficient Incentives for Agricultural Research: Lessons from Principal-Agent Theory," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 82(4), pages 828-841.
    3. 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.
    4. Richard J. Sexton, 2000. "Industrialization and Consolidation in the U.S. Food Sector: Implications for Competition and Welfare," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 82(5), pages 1087-1104.
    5. Bruce L. Gardner, 2000. "Economic Growth and Low Incomes in Agriculture," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 82(5), pages 1059-1074.
    6. V. Eldon Ball & Jean-Christophe Bureau & Richard Nehring & Agapi Somwaru, 1997. "Agricultural Productivity Revisited," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 79(4), pages 1045-1063.
    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. Tokgoz, Simla, 2003. "R&D Spillovers In Agriculture: Results From A North-South Trade Model," 2003 Annual meeting, July 27-30, Montreal, Canada 22258, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
    2. Huffman, Wallace & Evenson, Robert, 2003. "Determinants of the Demand for State Agricultural Experiment Station Resources: A Demand-System Approach," ISU General Staff Papers 200312010800001236, Iowa State University, Department of Economics.
    3. Huffman, Wallace, 2005. "Developments in the Organization and Finance of Public Agricultural Research in the United States, 1988-1999," Staff General Research Papers Archive 12485, Iowa State University, Department of Economics.
    4. Just, Richard E. & Huffman, Wallace E., 2009. "The economics of universities in a new age of funding options," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(7), pages 1102-1116, September.
    5. Jeremy D. Foltz & Bradford L. Barham, 2009. "The Productivity Effects of Extension Appointments in Land-Grant Colleges," Review of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 31(4), pages 712-733, December.
    6. repec:kap:iaecre:v:11:y:2005:i:2:p:201-213 is not listed on IDEAS
    7. Oscar Alfranca, 2005. "Private R&D and Spillovers in European Agriculture," International Advances in Economic Research, Springer;International Atlantic Economic Society, vol. 11(2), pages 201-213, May.
    8. Scalco, Paulo R. & Braga, Marcelo J., 2015. "Identification of Market Power in Bilateral Oligopoly: The Brazilian Wholesale Market of UHT Milk," 2015 Conference, August 9-14, 2015, Milan, Italy 212278, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    9. Lukáš Čechura & Tinoush Jamali Jaghdani, 2021. "Market Imperfections within the European Wheat Value Chain: The Case of France and the United Kingdom," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 11(9), pages 1-21, August.
    10. Çakır, Metin & Nolan, James, 2015. "Revisiting Concentration in Food and Agricultural Supply Chains: The Welfare Implications of Market Power in a Complementary Input Sector," Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Western Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 40(2), pages 1-17, May.
    11. Meilin Ma & Richard J. Sexton, 2021. "Modern agricultural value chains and the future of smallholder farming systems," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 52(4), pages 591-606, July.
    12. Peterson, Jeffrey M. & Boisvert, Richard N. & de Gorter, Harry, 1999. "Multifunctionality and Optimal Environmental Policies for Agriculture in an Open Economy," Working Papers 127701, Cornell University, Department of Applied Economics and Management.
    13. Parellada, Gabriel H. & Ekboir, Javier M., 2003. "Analisis del sistema argentino de investigacion agropecuaria," Economics Working Papers 7694, CIMMYT: International Maize and Wheat Improvement Center.
    14. Tong, Tingting & Yu, Tun-Hsiang Edward & Cho, Seong-Hoon & Jensen, Kimberly & De La Torre Ugarte, Daniel, 2013. "Evaluating the spatial spillover effects of transportation infrastructure on agricultural output across the United States," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 30(C), pages 47-55.
    15. Shifa, Abdulaziz B., 2011. "Does agricultural growth have a causal effect on manufacturing growth?," 2011 International Congress, August 30-September 2, 2011, Zurich, Switzerland 116003, European Association of Agricultural Economists.
    16. Tsionas, Mike G. & Malikov, Emir & Kumbhakar, Subal C., 2020. "Endogenous dynamic efficiency in the intertemporal optimization models of firm behavior," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 284(1), pages 313-324.
    17. David M. McEvoy & Sylvia Brandt & Sven Anders, 2009. "The Effects of ITQ Management on Fishermen’s Welfare When the Processing Sector Is Imperfectly Competitive," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 85(3), pages 470-484.
    18. Yucan Liu & C. Richard Shumway, 2009. "Induced Innovation in U.S. Agriculture: Time-series, Direct Econometric, and Nonparametric Tests," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 91(1), pages 224-236.
    19. Perekhozhuk, O. & Grings, M., 2008. "Ökonometrische Analyse von Marktmacht auf dem ukrainischen Markt für Rohmilch," Proceedings “Schriften der Gesellschaft für Wirtschafts- und Sozialwissenschaften des Landbaues e.V.”, German Association of Agricultural Economists (GEWISOLA), vol. 43, March.
    20. Perekhozhuk, Oleksandr & Grings, Michael, 2007. "Econometric Analysis Of Market Power On The Ukrainian Market For Raw Milk," 47th Annual Conference, Weihenstephan, Germany, September 26-28, 2007 7575, German Association of Agricultural Economists (GEWISOLA).
    21. Katie LaRue & Thomas Daum & Kai Mausch & Dave Harris, 2021. "Who Wants to Farm? Answers Depend on How You Ask: A Case Study on Youth Aspirations in Kenya," The European Journal of Development Research, Palgrave Macmillan;European Association of Development Research and Training Institutes (EADI), vol. 33(4), pages 885-909, August.

    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:cup:jagaec:v:33:y:2001:i:02:p:327-339_00. 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: Kirk Stebbing (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.cambridge.org/aae .

    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.