IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/evarev/v9y1985i3p243-262.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Economic Evaluation of Agricultural Research

Author

Listed:
  • David N. Bengston

    (University of Minnesota)

Abstract

Many evaluations of the economic impacts of investment in agricultural research have been carried out over the past three decades. This article reviews certain aspects of this literature. Instead of focusing on details of the evaluation approaches or findings of individual studies, the extent of the coverage of agricultural research is assessed. It is found that the work in this area is limited in several ways: Agricultural research evaluations have been mostly ex post in nature, evaluations have focused on production oriented research, and a single measure of worth related to economic efficiency is the end product of most evaluations. Implications for the use of research evaluations in research decision making are discussed in a concluding section.

Suggested Citation

  • David N. Bengston, 1985. "Economic Evaluation of Agricultural Research," Evaluation Review, , vol. 9(3), pages 243-262, June.
    • Handle: RePEc:sae:evarev:v:9:y:1985:i:3:p:243-262
    DOI: 10.1177/0193841X8500900301
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0193841X8500900301
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/0193841X8500900301?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. Davis, Jeffrey S., 1981. "The Relationship Between the Economic Surplus and Production Function Approaches for Estimating Ex-Post Returns to Agricultural Research," Review of Marketing and Agricultural Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 49(02), pages 1-11, August.
    2. Wallace E. Huffman, 1978. "Assessing Returns to Agricultural Extension," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 60(5), pages 969-975.
    3. Frantz, Molly, 1981. "Evaluation Information on Agricultural Research," Evaluation of Agricultural Research, Proceedings of a Workshop, Minneapolis, MN, May 12-13, 1980, Miscellaneous Publication 8 48984, University of Minnesota, Agricultural Experiment Station.
    4. Ellingson, Dennis & Peterson, Willis L., 1981. "The Allocation Of Research Personnel: Administrators' Response To Expected Rates To Return," Staff Papers 14093, University of Minnesota, Department of Applied Economics.
    5. Norton, George W. & Schuh, G. Edward, 1981. "Evaluating Returns to Social Science Research: Issues and Possible Methods," Evaluation of Agricultural Research, Proceedings of a Workshop, Minneapolis, MN, May 12-13, 1980, Miscellaneous Publication 8 49076, University of Minnesota, Agricultural Experiment Station.
    6. 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.
    7. Hayami, Yujiro & Peterson, Willis, 1972. "Social Returns to Public Information Services: Statistical Reporting of U. S. Farm Commodities," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 62(1), pages 119-130, March.
    8. E. Boyd Wennergren & Morris D. Whitaker, 1977. "Social Return to U.S. Technical Assistance in Bolivian Agriculture: The Case of Sheep and Wheat," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 59(3), pages 565-569.
    9. Robert Latimer & Don Paarlberg, 1965. "Geographic Distribution of Research Costs and Benefits," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 47(2), pages 234-241.
    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. Rausser, Gordon C. & de Janvry, Alain & Schmitz, Andrew & Zilberman, David D., 1980. "Principal issues in the evaluation of public research in agriculture," Department of Agricultural & Resource Economics, UC Berkeley, Working Paper Series qt74v9m7dh, Department of Agricultural & Resource Economics, UC Berkeley.
    2. Norton, George W. & Alwang, Jeffrey, 1997. "Policy for Plenty: Measuring the Benefits of Policy-oriented Social Science Research," Staff Papers 232552, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, Department of Agricultural and Applied Economics.
    3. 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.
    4. 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.
    5. Lindner, Robert K., 1987. "Toward A Framework For Evaluating Agricultural Economics Research," Australian Journal of Agricultural Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 31(2), pages 1-17, August.
    6. Azam, Qazi Tauqir & Bloom, Erik A. & Evenson, Robert E., 1991. "Agricultural Research Productivity in Pakistan," Center Discussion Papers 321325, Yale University, Economic Growth Center.
    7. Biggs SD. & Clay EJ., 1983. "Generation and diffusion of agricultural technology: a review of theories and experiences," ILO Working Papers 992260213402676, International Labour Organization.
    8. 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.
    9. Lindner, Bob, 1987. "Toward A Framework for Evaluating Agricultural Economics Research," Discussion Papers 315419, University of Western Australia, School of Agricultural and Resource Economics.
    10. Norton, George W., 1987. "Evaluating Social Science Research in Agriculture," Evaluating Agricultural Research and Productivity, Proceedings of a Workshop, Atlanta, Georgia, January 29-30, 1987, Miscellaneous Publication 52 50028, University of Minnesota, Agricultural Experiment Station.
    11. Vernon Ruttan, 1982. "Bureaucratic productivity: The case of agricultural research revisited — A rejoinder," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 39(2), pages 319-329, January.
    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. Rausser, Gordon C. & de Janvry, Alain & Schmitz, Andrew & Zilberman, David D., 1980. "Principal issues in the evaluation of public research in agriculture," Department of Agricultural & Resource Economics, UC Berkeley, Working Paper Series qt74v9m7dh, Department of Agricultural & Resource Economics, UC Berkeley.
    14. Schimmelpfennig, David E. & Norton, George W., 2000. "What Value Is Agricultural Economics Research?," 2000 Annual meeting, July 30-August 2, Tampa, FL 21773, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
    15. McVey, Marty Jay, 1996. "Valuing quality differentiated grains from a total logistics perspective," ISU General Staff Papers 1996010108000012326, Iowa State University, Department of Economics.
    16. 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.
    17. Schneeberger, Kenneth C., 1982. "Discussion: Valuation Of Crop And Livestock Reports: Methodological Issues And Questions," Southern Journal of Agricultural Economics, Southern Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 14(1), pages 1-2, July.
    18. 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.
    19. Jean-Paul Chavas & Rulon D. Pope, 1984. "Information: Its Measurement and Valuation," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 66(5), pages 705-710.
    20. Peterson, Willis L. & Hayami, Yujiro, 1977. "Technical Change in Agriculture," A Survey of Agricultural Economics Literature, Volume 1: Traditional Fields of Agricultural Economics 1940s to 1970s,, Agricultural and Applied 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:sae:evarev:v:9:y:1985:i:3:p:243-262. 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.