IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/taf/ragrxx/v58y2019i1p68-85.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Estimating and attributing benefits from wheat varietal innovations in South African agriculture

Author

Listed:
  • Charity R. Nhemachena
  • Johann F. Kirsten
  • Frikkie G. Liebenberg

Abstract

It is well accepted that biological innovations, particularly varietal improvements, have greatly contributed to agricultural yield and output growth in the past. At the same time, public funding for breeding programmes such as at the Agricultural Research Council in South Africa has dwindled. In an effort to confirm the importance of continued funding of varietal improvement programmes, this paper estimates the benefits from wheat varietal innovations and attributes them to the different institutional sources (public, private and others) that have contributed to varietal changes in South Africa. The empirical analyses used data on market shares of wheat varieties planted by farmers and annual quantities of wheat produced across different wheat-production areas in South Africa (summer dryland, dryland winter, and irrigation). A vintage regression model was estimated to calculate the proportional yield gain from wheat varietal improvements. The results indicated that the rate of gain in yield as a result of releases of new wheat varieties (variety research) was 0.8 per cent per year (equivalent to 19.84 kg/ha/year) for dryland summer varieties, and 0.5 per cent for both irrigation (equivalent to 32.20 kg/ha/year) and dryland winter varieties (equivalent to 16.65 kg/ha/year). The attribution of benefits among different institutional sources confirms that not accounting for attribution of benefits by source and time period results is overestimation of benefits to any specific research programme. Attribution of benefits by institutional source showed that Sensako dominated, while the share of the ARC-SGI substantially declined, after deregulation of the wheat sub-sector. The results highlight the impact of the decline in public funding for wheat variety improvement research after deregulation and provide a strong argument for continued public funding for variety improvement in South Africa.

Suggested Citation

  • Charity R. Nhemachena & Johann F. Kirsten & Frikkie G. Liebenberg, 2019. "Estimating and attributing benefits from wheat varietal innovations in South African agriculture," Agrekon, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 58(1), pages 68-85, January.
    • Handle: RePEc:taf:ragrxx:v:58:y:2019:i:1:p:68-85
    DOI: 10.1080/03031853.2018.1518150
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1080/03031853.2018.1518150
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1080/03031853.2018.1518150?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
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version below or search for a different version of it.

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Pal, Suresh, 2011. "Impacts of CGIAR Crop Improvement and Natural Resource Management Research: A Review of Evidence," Agricultural Economics Research Review, Agricultural Economics Research Association (India), vol. 24(2), December.
    2. Prabhu Pingali, 2010. "Global agriculture R&D and the changing aid architecture," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 41(s1), pages 145-153, November.
    3. 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).
    4. 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.
    5. Maredia, Mywish K. & Byerlee, Derek, 2000. "Efficiency of research investments in the presence of international spillovers: wheat research in developing countries," Agricultural Economics, Blackwell, vol. 22(1), pages 1-16, January.
    6. Brennan, John P. & Quade, Kathryn J., 2004. "Analysis of the Impact of CIMMYT Research on the Australian Wheat Industry," Research Reports 42505, New South Wales Department of Primary Industries Research Economists.
    7. Shenggen Fan & Connie Chan‐Kang & Keming Qian & K. Krishnaiah, 2005. "National and international agricultural research and rural poverty: the case of rice research in India and China," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 33(s3), pages 369-379, November.
    8. Rao, Xudong & Hurley, Terrance M. & Pardey, Philip G., 2019. "Are agricultural R&D returns declining and development dependent?," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 122(C), pages 27-37.
    9. Dlamini, Thula Sizwe & Magingxa, Litha & Liebenberg, Frikkie, 2015. "Estimating the economic value of the national cultivar trials in South Africa: A case for sorghum, sunflower, soybeans and dry beans," 2015 Fourth Congress, June 11-12, 2015, Ancona, Italy 207288, Italian Association of Agricultural and Applied Economics (AIEAA).
    10. 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.
    11. Mywish K. Maredia & Richard Bernsten & Catherine Ragasa, 2010. "Returns to public sector plant breeding in the presence of spill‐ins and private goods: the case of bean research in Michigan," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 41(5), pages 425-442, September.
    12. Fuglie, Keith O. & Heisey, Paul W., 2007. "Economic Returns to Public Agricultural Research," Economic Brief 6388, United States Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Charity Ruramai Nhemachena & Johann F. Kirsten & Binganidzo Muchara, 2019. "The Effects of Plant Breeders’ Rights on Wheat Productivity and Varietal Improvement in South African Agriculture," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(12), pages 1-16, June.

    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. Mywish K. Maredia & Richard Bernsten & Catherine Ragasa, 2010. "Returns to public sector plant breeding in the presence of spill‐ins and private goods: the case of bean research in Michigan," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 41(5), pages 425-442, September.
    2. Julian M. Alston & Philip G. Pardey & Xudong Rao, 2022. "Payoffs to a half century of CGIAR research," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 104(2), pages 502-529, March.
    3. Reyes, Byron A. & Maredia, Mywish K. & Bernsten, Richard H. & Rosas, Juan Carlos, 2016. "Opportunities Seized, Opportunities Missed: Differences in the Economic Impact of Bean Research in Five Latin American Countries," Food Security International Development Working Papers 251850, Michigan State University, Department of Agricultural, Food, and Resource Economics.
    4. Bert Lenaerts & Yann de Mey & Matty Demont, 2018. "Global impact of accelerated plant breeding: Evidence from a meta-analysis on rice breeding," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 13(6), pages 1-21, June.
    5. Hurley, Terrance M. & Pardey, Philip G. & Rao, Xudong & Andrade, Robert S., 2016. "Returns to Food and Agricultural R&D Investments Worldwide, 1958-2015," Briefs 249356, University of Minnesota, International Science and Technology Practice and Policy.
    6. Arega D. Alene & Abebe Menkir & S. O. Ajala & B. Badu‐Apraku & A. S. Olanrewaju & V. M. Manyong & Abdou Ndiaye, 2009. "The economic and poverty impacts of maize research in West and Central Africa," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 40(5), pages 535-550, September.
    7. 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.
    8. Mullen, J. D., 2002. "Farm Management In The 21st Century," 2002 Conference (46th), February 13-15, 2002, Canberra, Australia 174072, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society.
    9. Bervejillo, Jose E. & Alston, Julian M. & Tumber, Kabir P., 2011. "The Economic Returns to Public Agricultural Research in Uruguay," Working Papers 162518, Robert Mondavi Institute Center for Wine Economics.
    10. Bervejillo, Jose E. & Alston, Julian M. & Tumber, Kabir P., 2012. "The benefits from public agricultural research in Uruguay," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 56(4), pages 1-23, December.
    11. Heisey, Paul W. & Morris, Michael L., 2002. "Practical Challenges To Estimating The Benefits Of Agricultural R&D: The Case Of Plant Breeding Research," 2002 Annual meeting, July 28-31, Long Beach, CA 19828, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
    12. Ruttan, Vernon W., 2003. "Assessing The Economic Value Of Research," Staff Papers 13613, University of Minnesota, Department of Applied Economics.
    13. Wang, Sun Ling & Ball, V. Eldon & Fulginiti, Lilyan E. & Plastina, Alejandro S., 2012. "Benefits of Public R&D in U.S. Agriculture: Spill-Ins, Extension, and Roads," 2012 Conference, August 18-24, 2012, Foz do Iguacu, Brazil 126368, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    14. Xudong Rao & Terrance M. Hurley & Philip G. Pardey, 2020. "Recalibrating the reported returns to agricultural R&D: what if we all heeded Griliches?," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 64(3), pages 977-1001, July.
    15. Solis, Daniel & Bravo-Ureta, Boris E., 2003. "Rates Of Return To Private Agricultural Extension: Evidence From Two Farm Management Centers In El Salvador," 2003 Annual meeting, July 27-30, Montreal, Canada 22186, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
    16. You, Liangzhi, 2012. "A tale of two countries: Spatial and temporal patterns of rice productivity in China and Brazil," China Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 23(3), pages 690-703.
    17. Hurley, Terrance M. & Pardey, Philip G. & Rao, Xudong, 2013. "Returns to Food and Agricultural R&D Investments Worldwide, 1958-2011," Briefs 159649, University of Minnesota, International Science and Technology Practice and Policy.
    18. Pardey, Philip G. & Koo, Bonwoo & Nottenburg, Carol, 2004. "Creating, Protecting, And Using Crop Biotechnologies Worldwide In An Era Of Intellectual Property," Staff Papers 13600, University of Minnesota, Department of Applied Economics.
    19. Guesmi, Bouali & Gil, Jose Maria, 2017. "Measuring the impact of agricultural research on Catalan agricultural productivity," 2017 International Congress, August 28-September 1, 2017, Parma, Italy 261279, European Association of Agricultural Economists.
    20. Alston, Julian M., 2002. "Spillovers," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 46(3), pages 1-32.

    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:taf:ragrxx:v:58:y:2019:i:1:p:68-85. 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: Chris Longhurst (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.tandfonline.com/ragr20 .

    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.