IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/evarev/v12y1988i3p276-290.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Research Planning and Evaluation in the U.S. Forest Service

Author

Listed:
  • David N. Bengston

    (USDA Forest Service and University of Minnesota)

  • H. Fred Kaiser

    (USDA Forest Service)

Abstract

As public agency budgets have tightened in recent years, research policymakers and administrators have recognized the need to improve the planning and evaluation of research projects and programs. This article describes the current planning and evaluation process in U.S. Forest Service research. Options for improving this process are then discussed, including strengthening medium-range research planning, introducing formal preevaluation, monitoring research progress more closely, and strengthening postevaluation of research investments. Refinements in research planning and evaluation such as these will help strengthen the case for public support, improve the allocation of scarce research dollars, and help direct research programs into the most socially profitable areas.

Suggested Citation

  • David N. Bengston & H. Fred Kaiser, 1988. "Research Planning and Evaluation in the U.S. Forest Service," Evaluation Review, , vol. 12(3), pages 276-290, June.
    • Handle: RePEc:sae:evarev:v:12:y:1988:i:3:p:276-290
    DOI: 10.1177/0193841X8801200304
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0193841X8801200304
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/0193841X8801200304?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. Blakeslee, Leroy L., 1987. "Measuring the Requirements and Benefits of Productivity Maintenance Research," Evaluating Agricultural Research and Productivity, Proceedings of a Workshop, Atlanta, Georgia, January 29-30, 1987, Miscellaneous Publication 52 50021, University of Minnesota, Agricultural Experiment Station.
    2. C. Richard Shumway, 1981. "Subjectivity in Ex Ante Research Evaluation," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 63(1), pages 169-173.
    3. 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.
    4. George W. Norton & Jeffrey S. Davis, 1981. "Evaluating Returns to Agricultural Research: A Review," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 63(4), pages 685-699.
    5. Araji, A.A., 1981. "The Economic Impact of Investment in Integrated Pest Management," Evaluation of Agricultural Research, Proceedings of a Workshop, Minneapolis, MN, May 12-13, 1980, Miscellaneous Publication 8 49056, University of Minnesota, Agricultural Experiment Station.
    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. Biggs SD. & Clay EJ., 1983. "Generation and diffusion of agricultural technology: a review of theories and experiences," ILO Working Papers 992260213402676, International Labour Organization.
    2. 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.
    3. Araji, A. A. & Hafez, S., 2001. "The Economic And Environmental Impacts Of Investment In Agricultural Biotechnology Research," A.E. Research Series 305028, University of Idaho, Department of Agricultural Economics and Rural Sociology.
    4. McVey, Marty Jay, 1996. "Valuing quality differentiated grains from a total logistics perspective," ISU General Staff Papers 1996010108000012326, Iowa State University, Department of Economics.
    5. Aaron Michael Shew & Alvaro Durand‐Morat & Lawton Lanier Nalley & Karen Ann‐Kuenzel Moldenhauer, 2018. "Estimating the benefits of public plant breeding: beyond profits," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 49(6), pages 753-764, November.
    6. A. C. Herruzo, 1992. "Producer Benefits From Technology Induced Supply Shifts In The Ec Cotton Regime," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 43(1), pages 56-63, January.
    7. Travis, Elli & Alwang, Albert & Elliott-Engel, Jeremy, 2018. "Developing a Holistic Assessment for Land Grant University Economic Impact Studies: A Case Study," 2018 Annual Meeting, February 2-6, 2018, Jacksonville, Florida 266789, Southern Agricultural Economics Association.
    8. Thirtle, Colin, 1986. "The Production Function Approach to the Relationship Between Productivity Growth and R & D," Manchester Working Papers in Agricultural Economics 232791, University of Manchester, School of Economics, Agricultural Economics Department.
    9. Bradford F. Mills, 1998. "Ex Ante Research Evaluation and Regional Trade Flows: Maize in Kenya," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 49(3), pages 393-408, September.
    10. Araji, A. A. & White, F. C. & Guenthner, J. F., 1994. "Return To Potato Research," A.E. Research Series 305115, University of Idaho, Department of Agricultural Economics and Rural Sociology.
    11. Bruce Koppel & Edmund Oasa, 1987. "Induced Innovation Theory and Asia's Green Revolution: A Case Study of an Ideology of Neutrality," Development and Change, International Institute of Social Studies, vol. 18(1), pages 29-67, January.
    12. Azam, Qazi Tauqir & Bloom, Erik A. & Evenson, Robert E., 1991. "Agricultural Research Productivity in Pakistan," Center Discussion Papers 321325, Yale University, Economic Growth Center.
    13. T. J. P. Voon, 1992. "A Cross‐Commodity Appraisal Of Demand‐Raising Research Benefits: Pork And Chicken In Australia," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 43(2), pages 243-247, May.
    14. Upton, Martin, 1991. "Economic quantification of the benefits of agricultural research," Centre for Agricultural Strategy - Papers and Reports 337807, University of Reading.
    15. Hardaker, J. Brian & Anderson, Jock R. & Dillon, John L., 1984. "Perspectives On Assessing The Impacts Of Improved Agricultural Technologies In Developing Countries," Australian Journal of Agricultural Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 28(2-3), pages 1-22, August.
    16. Miller, Gay & Rosenblatt, Joseph & Hushak, Leroy, 1987. "The Effects Of Supply Shifts On Producers Surplus," 1987 Annual Meeting, August 2-5, East Lansing, Michigan 270116, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
    17. Araji, A. A. & Guenthner, J., 2002. "Genetically Modified (Gm) Foods: Consumers' And Producers' Perceptions And The Economic - Environmental Benefits," A.E. Research Series 305032, University of Idaho, Department of Agricultural Economics and Rural Sociology.
    18. Madan M. Dey & Ferdinand J. Paraguas & Patrick Kambewa & Diemuth E. Pemsl, 2010. "The impact of integrated aquaculture–agriculture on small‐scale farms in Southern Malawi," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 41(1), pages 67-79, January.
    19. Fuglie, Keith & Ballenger, Nicole & Rubenstein, Kelly Day & Klotz, Cassandra & Ollinger, Michael & Reilly, John & Vasavada, Utpal & Yee, Jet, 1996. "Agricultural Research and Development: Public and Private Investments Under Alternative Markets and Institutions," Agricultural Economic Reports 262031, United States Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service.
    20. S. Pandey & R. K. Lindner & R. W. Medd, 1993. "Towards An Economic Framework For Evaluating Potential Benefits From Research Into Weed Control," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 44(2), pages 322-334, May.

    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:sae:evarev:v:12:y:1988:i:3:p:276-290. 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: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    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.