Date post: | 08-Apr-2018 |
Category: |
Documents |
Upload: | koosterhuis |
View: | 216 times |
Download: | 0 times |
of 55
8/6/2019 3568 Pardey Pingali 2010 GCARD Text Figs Tabs 1
1/55
ReassessingInternationalAgriculturalResearch
forFoodandAgriculture
PhilipG.Pardey
PrabhuL.Pingali
March2010
ReportpreparedfortheGlobalConferenceonAgriculturalResearchforDevelopment(GCARD),
Montpellier,France,2831March2010. PhilipPardeyisaprofessorintheDepartmentofApplied
EconomicsattheUniversityofMinnesota,andDirectoroftheUniversitysInternationalScienceand
TechnologyPracticeandPolicy(InSTePP)Center. PrabhuPingaliisaDeputyDirectoroftheGlobal
DevelopmentProgramoftheBillandMelindaGatesFoundation. PartsofthispaperdrawfromPardey
andAlston(2010),althoughthatpaperhasanexplicitU.S.focuswhereasthepresentpaperisoriented
tointernationalresearch. TheauthorsthankConnieChanKang,JasonBeddow,JenniJames,andStan
Woodforespeciallyvaluableinputintothepreparationofthispaper. Fundingtosupportthe
preparationofthispaperwasprovidedbytheGlobalForumonAgriculturalResearch,drawingon
researchfundedbytheBillandMelindaGatesFoundationbywayoftheHarvestChoiceproject(see
www.HarvestChoice.org),andtheUniversityofMinnesota.
Copyright(c)(2010)byPhilipG.PardeyandPrabhuPingali
8/6/2019 3568 Pardey Pingali 2010 GCARD Text Figs Tabs 1
2/55
ABSTRACT
The20thCenturybeganwitharapidrampingupofnationalinvestmentsinandinstitutions
engagedwithresearchforfoodandagriculture. Privatephilanthropicorganizationslaunched
agriculturalR&Dinitiativesaroundthemiddleofthecenturytospurtechnicalchangeinpoor
countryagriculture. Thisbroadenedtoincludejointlyconceivedpublicandprivateeffortstofund
internationalagriculturalR&Dinthe1970s. Asthe21stcenturyunfolds,theglobalscienceand
agriculturaldevelopmentlandscapesarechanginginsubstantiveways,withimportant
implicationsforthefunding,conductandinstitutionalarrangementsaffectinginternationally
conceivedandconductedresearchforfoodandagriculture. Whilethereisageneralconsensus
thatthepresentandprospectivefutureoftheagriculturalsciencelandscapebearslittle
resemblancetothesituationsthatprevailedintheformativeyearsoftodaysfoodand
agriculturalresearchpoliciesandinstitutions,manyofthesechangesarepoorlyunderstoodor
onlybeginningtoplayout. Inthispaperwereportonnewandemergingempiricalevidenceto
calibratetheprivateandpublicchoicesbeingmadethataffectfoodandagriculturalR&D
worldwide. Weinvestigatetheresearchlag,benefitappropriability,andR&Dspilloverrealities
facinginnovativeeffortintheseareas. WealsodiscusstheeconomiesofsizeandscopeofR&D,
andbroadentheresearchperspectivebeyondinnovationtoencompasstechnology
development,uptakeandregulation. Seeminglyseismicshiftsintheglobalagricultural
productivitylandscapesarealsoquantitativelyexamined,alongwithnewinformationonthe
trendsininvestmentinR&Dthathaveconsequencesforfoodandagriculture.
Keywords:spillovers,public,private,lags,technologyregulation,productivity,spatial
8/6/2019 3568 Pardey Pingali 2010 GCARD Text Figs Tabs 1
3/55
CONTENTS
1. Introduction
2.
Policy
and
Practical
Realities
of
Food
and
Agriculture
R&D
2.1 ResearchLagLengths
2.2 TheShiftingLocationofAgriculturalProduction
2.3 Appropriability
2.4 R&DSpillovers
Spatial
Disciplinary
2.5
Economiesof
Size,
Scale
and
Scope
2.6 ResearchTechnologyRegulation3.R&DandProductivity
3.1 GlobalProductivityPatterns
3.2 R&DPatterns
4. TheWayForwardLinkingGlobalR&DtoNaonalNeeds
8/6/2019 3568 Pardey Pingali 2010 GCARD Text Figs Tabs 1
4/55
ReassessingInternationalAgriculturalResearch
forFoodandAgriculture
1. IntroductionInthepasthalfcentury,agriculturalscienceachievedagreatdeal. Since1960,theworldspopulation
hasmorethandoubled,from3.1billionto6.7billion,andrealpercapitaincomehasnearlytripled.
Overthesameperiod,totalproductionofcerealsgrewfasterthanpopulation,from877millionmetric
tonsin1961toover2,351millionmetrictonsin2007,andthisincreasewaslargelyowingto
unprecedentedincreasesincropyields.1 ThefactthattheMalthusiannightmarehasnotbeenrealized
overthepast50yearsisattributableinlargeparttoimprovementsinagriculturalproductivityachieved
throughtechnologicalchangeenabledbyinvestmentsinagriculturalR&D.
Butthereismuchlefttodo. Recentandsubstantialrunupsinglobalcommoditypriceshad
directanddetrimentalimpactsonthenumberofhungrypeopleworldwide,andraisedoldconcerns
abouttheabilityofsustainingincreasesinagriculturalsupplytomeetthefuturefood,feed,fiber,and
fueldemandsplacedonagriculture.2 ThisinturnraisestensionsandpossibletradeoffsintargetingR&D
investmentstoaddressglobalfoodsupplyandsecurityconcernsversusR&Ddesignedtomoredirectly
addressincomedistributionandpovertyconcerns. Compoundingtheseconcernsarethestilllargely
unchartedanduncertainimplicationsofglobalclimatechangesforworldagriculture.
Theimmediacyandimportanceoftheseissues,andtheirimplicationsforfoodandagricultural
R&D,bespeaktheirhistories. Publiclyfundedandconductedresearchforfoodandagricultureonlytook
holdinthemid tolate1800s,butthenpickeduppaceintheearlydecadesofthe20thCenturyasthe
scientificunderpinningsofsoilchemistry,Mendeliangenetics,thepurelinetheoryofJohannson,the
1ObtainedfromUnitedNationsFAO,FAOSTATonlinedatabase,foundathttp://faostat.fao.org. AccessedSeptember
2009.
2InSeptember2008theUnitedNationsFoodandAgricultureOrganizationreleasedaprovisionalsetofestimates(FAO
2008c)indicatingthatthenumberofundernourishedpeoplein2007increasedby75millionoverandaboveFAOs
estimateof848millionundernourishedin200305,withmuchofthisincreaseattributedtohighfoodprices. Thisbrings
thenumberofundernourishedpeopleworldwideto923millionin2007,ofwhich907million[are]inthedeveloping
world. Morerecently,FAO(2009a)estimatedthatanadditional100millionpeoplearenowundernourished,increasing
thetotaltooveronebillion.
8/6/2019 3568 Pardey Pingali 2010 GCARD Text Figs Tabs 1
5/55
mutationtheoryofdeVries,andPasteursgermtheoryofdiseasebegantorealizetheirpotentials.3
Private,philanthropicorganizationssuchastheRockefellerFoundationlaunchedagriculturalR&D
initiativesaroundthemiddleofthecenturytospurtechnicalchangeinpoorcountryagriculture. This
broadenedtoincludejointlyconceivedpublicandprivateeffortstofundinternationalagriculturalR&D
conductedinpurposebuilt,independentcentersofresearchinthe1960s,whicheventuallygaveriseto
aninstitutionalinnovationtocollectivelyfundthisresearch,namelytheConsultativeGroupon
InternationalAgriculturalResearch(CGIAR)formedin1971.4
Asthe21stCenturyunfolds,theglobalscienceandagriculturaldevelopmentlandscapesare
changinginsubstantiveways,withimportantimplicationsforthefunding,conductandinstitutional
arrangementsaffectinginternationallyconceivedandconductedresearchforfoodandagriculture.
Manyofthesechangesarepoorlyunderstoodandsomeareonlybeginningtoplayout,sothe
magnitudeandevendirectionofthedeparturesfromorthecontinuingpaceofpasttrendsisnot
known. Nonetheless,theserealitieshaveimportantbearingsontheprivateandpublicchoices
presentlybeingmaderegardingresearchthataffectsfoodandagriculture. Assemblingwhatweknow
aboutthesestrategicdevelopmentsandunderstandingtheirlikelyimplicationsarekeytomakingmore
informedand,hopefully,moreefficientuseofscarceresearchresources,andwhereappropriate
mobilizingandprioritizingadditionalresearcheffort.
In
this
paper
we
focus
on
some
of
the
more
important
developments
affecting
(or
being
affected
by)agriculturalR&Dworldwide. Wereexaminewhatweknowaboutresearchlags,andthe
appropriabilityofthebenefitsfromresearch,whichhaveadirectbearingonpublicandprivate
incentivesforinnovationinfoodandagriculture. Apivotaldimensionofinternationallyconceivedand
conductedresearchforfoodandagricultureisthecrossborderpotentialforresearchdoneinonelocale
toaffectproductivitygrowthinanother. Tothatendweprovideentirelynewinformationtobetter
understandtheseresearchspilloverpotentials. WealsodiscussthechangingeconomicsoftheR&D
3VonLiebigsbookOrganicChemistryinItsApplicationtoAgricultureandPhysiologypublishedin1840inbothGermany
andGreatBritaintriggeredwidespreadinterestintheapplicationofsciencetoagriculture. Likeothers,Ruttan(1982)
viewedvonLiebigsbookasthecriticaldividinglineintheevolutionofmodernagriculturalscience.
4TheCGIARhasexpandeditssubjectmatterscopewellbeyonditsinitialfocusonfoodstaplesanditsinstitutionalscope
wellbeyondthatofafinancinginstrumentbyassuminggovernance,representational,andserviceprovisionfunctions.
SeeAlston,DehmerandPardey(2006),PingaliandKelly(2007)andthereferencesthereinfordescriptionsand
interpretationsofthishistory.
8/6/2019 3568 Pardey Pingali 2010 GCARD Text Figs Tabs 1
6/55
processitself,notablytheeconomiesofsizeandscopeofR&D,andbroadentheresearchperspective
beyondinnovationtoencompasstechnologydevelopment,uptakeandregulation.
Atroot,concernsaboutfoodandagriculturalsuppliesareconcernsaboutthepace,nature,
directionandconsequencesofagriculturalproductivitygrowth,andsowereviewwhatispresently
knownabouttheseproductivitypatterns. SomeoftheimportantR&Dinvestmenttrendsthat
circumscribeproductivitypotentialsarealsointroducedandbrieflydiscussed.
2. PolicyandPracticalRealitiesofFoodandAgricultureR&DInnovationinagriculturehasmanyfeaturesincommonwithinnovationmoregenerally,butalso
someimportantdifferences. Inmanywaysthestudyofinnovationisastudyofmarketfailureandthe
individualandcollectiveactionsnotablyinvestinginagriculturalR&Dtakentodealwithit. Like
otherpartsoftheeconomy,agricultureischaracterizedbymarketfailuresassociatedwithincomplete
propertyrightsoverinventions. Theatomisticstructureofmuchofagriculturemeansthatthe
attenuationofincentivestoinnovateismorepronounced(andparticularlysoinmanyofthepoorest
partsoftheworldwheretheaveragefarmsizeatleastasdenominatedbyfarmedareaissmall,
andgettingsmaller)thaninotherindustriesthataremoreconcentratedintheirindustrialstructure.
Ontheotherhand,unlikemostinnovationsinmanufacturing,foodprocessing,ortransportation,
technologiesusedinproductionagriculturehavedegreesofsitespecificity. Thebiologicalnatureof
agriculturalproductionmeansthattheappropriatetechnologyoftenvarieswith(local,sometimeson
farm)variationinclimate,soiltypes,topography,latitude,altitude,anddistancefrommarkets. The
sitespecificaspectcircumscribes,butbynomeansremoves,thepotentialforknowledgespillovers
andtheassociatedmarketfailuresthatareexacerbatedbythesmallscale,atomisticindustrial
structureofagriculture.
Theseandsomeotherimportantrealitiesofresearchforfoodandagriculturearepoorly
understoodbythosenotfamiliarwiththefacts. Otherrealitieshavechangedinwaysthatwehave
failedtoproperlymeasureoradequatelyinvestigate. Inaddition,importanttechnical,marketand
climatecircumstancesintheyearsaheadmaybedifferentinimportantrespectstoourmeasured
past. Itistosomeofthepastandemergingrealitiesthatmaywellhavestrategicpolicyandpractical
implicationsregardinginternationalresearchforfoodandagriculturethatwenowturn.
8/6/2019 3568 Pardey Pingali 2010 GCARD Text Figs Tabs 1
7/55
2.1 ResearchLagLengths
Theprojectbasedfundingthatcomesmainlyfromaidagencies(ratherthanscienceoreven
agriculturalministries)andisnowtheprevalentformofsupportforCGIARresearchofteninvolvesup
tothreeor,insomelimitedcases,fiveyearfundingcycles,onlysomeofwhicharerenewedand
sustainedforlongerperiods.5 Impatientorpoliticallyconstrainedfundersalsofrequentlypressurefor
demonstrableevidenceofdevelopmentimpactsattheterminationoftheseprojects,orasa
preconditionforfurtherfunding. Unfortunately,manyoftheseagriculturalresearchinvestment
initiativesaremyopic;fundamentallymisconstruingthenatureandlengthofthelagsbetweenR&D
investmentsandtheeconomicandsocialreturnsrealizedfromthatinvestment. Infact,theselagsare
generallylong,oftenspanningdecades,notmonthsoryears.
Thedynamicstructurelinkingresearchspendingandproductivityinvolvesaconfluenceof
processesincludingthecreationanddestructionofknowledgestocksandtheadoptionand
disadoptionofinnovationsoverspaceandtimeeachofwhichhasitsowncomplexdynamics. The
scienceinvolvedisacumulativeprocess,throughwhichtodaysnewideasarederivedfromthe
accumulatedstockofpastideas. Thisfeatureofscienceinfluencesthenatureoftheresearch
productivityrelationshipaswell,makingthecreationofknowledgeunlikeotherproduction
processes. Theevidenceforlongresearchproductivitylagsiscompelling. Oneformofevidence
stemsfromstatisticaleffortstoestablishtherelationshipbetweencurrentandpastR&Dspending
andagriculturalproductivity. Thedozensofstudiesdonetodateindicatethattheproductivity
consequencesofpublicagriculturalR&Daredistributedovermanydecades,withalagof1525years
beforepeakimpactsarereachedandwithcontinuingeffectsfordecadesafterwards.6
ThestatisticalevidencelinkingoverallinvestmentsinaggregateagriculturalR&Dtoagricultural
productivitygrowtharereinforcedbytheotherevidenceaboutresearchandadoptionlagprocessesfor
particulartechnologies,especiallycropvarietiesaboutwhichwehavealotofspecificinformation. The
developmentanduptakeofvarietaltechnologiesworldwidehasbeenmuchstudied(see,forexample,
5Likewise,counterpartfundingformuchpublicresearchconductedbynationalagencieshasbecomeincreasingly
contestableandprojectbased.
6Alstonetal.(2010seealsofootnote2)reviewedthepriorliterature. Theyalsodevelopedtheirownestimatesusing
newlyconstructedU.S.statelevelproductivityover19492002andU.S.federalandstatespendingonagriculturalR&D
andextensionover18902002. Theirpreferredmodelhadapeaklaggedresearchimpactatyear24andatotallaglength
of50years.
8/6/2019 3568 Pardey Pingali 2010 GCARD Text Figs Tabs 1
8/55
EvensonandGollin2003),butarguablythemostcomprehensiveevidenceonthesetechnicalchanges
overthepastcenturyormorehasbeenassembledfortheUnitedStatesandisillustrativeofthemore
generalpicture.
Figure1providesnewdataonthreewavesofvarietaltechnologiesintheUnitedStates
beginningintheearly1900s. Hybridcorntechnology,whichtookoffinU.S.farmersfieldsinthe1930s,
haditsscientificrootsinfocusedresearchthatbeganin1918(andarguablybeforethen,atleasttothe
early1890s). ThustheR&Dorinnovationlagwasatleast10yearsandmayhavebeen2030years. The
timepathoftheadoptionprocessesextendsthelaglengthsevenfurther. Iowahad10percentofits
cornacreageplantedtohybridsin1936(with90percentofitscornacreagesoplantedjustfouryears
later),whileittookuntil1948beforeAlabamaastatewithdistinctiveagroecologicalattributes
comparedwiththeprincipalCornBeltstateshad10percentofitscornacreageunderhybrids. By
1950,80percentandby1960,almostallofthecorngrownintheUnitedStateswashybridcorn.
Lookingacrossallthestates,thetechnologydiffusionprocesswasspreadoverabout30years,reflecting
theenvelopeofadoptionprocessesthatweremuchmorerapidinanyindividualstate. Takingthe
entireresearch,development,andadoptionprocessforhybridcornashavingbegunaslateas1918,the
totalprocessthathadbeenaccomplishedby1960tookplaceoveraperiodofatleast40yearsand
possiblydecadeslonger.
The
semi
dwarf
wheat
and
rice
varietal
technologies
that
lay
at
the
heart
of
the
Green
RevolutionalsofoundtheirwayintoU.S.agricultureviaadaptiveresearch. Thefirstcommercially
significantuseofsemidwarfwheatsintheUnitedStatesoccurredin1961. Theearly(andmostrapid)
uptakeofthistechnologywasinCalifornia,withagroecologiesmuchlikethoseinNorthernMexico
whereNormanBorlaugbredmostoftheearly,shortstaturedCIMMYTvarieties. Thelargewheatbelt
statesoftheDakotasandMinnesotahaddistinctiverustandotherdiseaseproblemsthatdelayedthe
entryofsemidwarfnessintotheselocalesuntilresistancetothesebioticconstraintswascrossbred
intoshort
statured
wheats.
Thus
ittook
30
years
before
80
percent
of
the
U.S.
wheat
acreage
was
plantedtosemidwarfvarieties.
Withitsemphasisonvarietalquality,thespreadofhigheryielding(butinitiallyatleast,less
appealingtoeat)semidwarfricevarietiesintheUnitedStateslaggedconsiderablybehindthe
irrigatedareasinAsiawherethepriorityinthe1960sand1970swastoraisecropyieldsandincrease
8/6/2019 3568 Pardey Pingali 2010 GCARD Text Figs Tabs 1
9/55
riceproduction(HerdtandCapule1983). Beginningin1979,semidwarfricevarietiesgained
acceptanceintheUnitedStates,butby2005only68percenttotheU.S.riceacreagewasplantedto
varietieswiththischaracteristic.
Hasmodern(bio)technologymateriallyspedupthisresearchinnovationadoptionprocess,as
iscommonlysuggested? Geneticallyengineered(GE)cornwasfirstplantedonU.S.farmersfieldsin
themid1990s. TheadoptioncumdiffusionprocessforGEcropsisnotyetcomplete,thetechnology
itselfiscontinuingtoevolve,andthemaximumadoptionratehasnotyetbeenachieved;by2008,80
percentofU.S.cornacreagewasplantedtoGEvarieties. Likehybridcorn,biotechcornhasbeen
adoptedatdifferentratesindifferentstates,butperhapsfordifferentreasons. This,asyet
incomplete,processoverlessthan15yearsrepresentsonlypartoftherelevanttimelag. Tothatwe
mustaddthetimespentconductingrelativelybasicandappliedresearchtodevelopandevaluatethe
technology,andthetime(andmoney)spentafterthetechnologyhadbeendevelopedtomeetthe
requirementsforregulatoryapprovalbyarangeofgovernmentagencies.
ComparedwiththeadoptioncumdiffusionprocessforhybridcornwithintheUnitedStates,
theprocessforbiotechcornappearstohavebeenalittlefaster. Themaindifferencemaybethatall
statesbegantoadopttogether,withouttheslowerspatialdiffusionamongstatesthatcharacterized
hybridcorn,possiblybecauseofimprovedcommunicationsandfarmereducation,perhapsassistedby
public
extension
services.
Thus
biotech
corn
achieved
80
percent
adoption
within
13
years
compared
with19yearsforhybridcornor30yearsforsemidwarfwheat. However,otherelementsofthe
processmaybegettinglonger. Forinstance,theprocessofregulatoryapprovalmayhaveaddeda
further510yearstotheR&Dlag(andthisregulatoryapprovallagforbiotechcropsappearstobe
gettinglonger). Givenarangeof10to20yearsspentonR&Dtodevelopthetechnologiesthat
enabledthecreationofbiotechcrops,andthenthetimespenttodeveloptheinitialvarietiesand
improvethem,theoverallprocessofinnovationinthecaseofbiotechcornmayhavetaken20to30
yearsso
far.
Insum,theseU.S.examplesspanaspectrumofresearchrealities:researchtodevelop
fundamentallynew(bioengineered)traitsforspecificcrops,researchtoadaptandfacilitatespillinsof
semidwarftechnologiesoriginatingelsewhereintheworld,andtheaggregateproductivity
promotingconsequencesofoverallspendingonagriculturalR&D. Thesecaseshelpanchorour
8/6/2019 3568 Pardey Pingali 2010 GCARD Text Figs Tabs 1
10/55
expectationsabouttheconsiderablelagsinvolvedinrealizingsocialandeconomicvaluefrom
investmentsinR&D,eveninacountrysuchastheUnitedStatesthatisnotundulyconstrainedby
limitedruralinfrastructure,poorcommunications,institutionalinstabilities,andrestrictiveseed
release(andrelated)commercializationpoliciesandpractices. Bythismeasurealone,investmentsin
agriculturalR&Darebestseenasanespeciallyeffectivemeansofachievinglongruneconomic
growthanddevelopmentobjectivesspanningmanydecades,ratherthananinterventioninstrument
toachievenearterm,incomedistributionoreconomicdevelopmentobjectives.
2.2 TheShiftingLocationofAgriculturalProduction
PolicymyopiaisoneproblemconfrontingagriculturalR&D. Another,andrelated,problemisa
seeminglywidespreadlackofappreciationofthespatialmobilityofagriculture. Contrarytocommon
perceptions,agriculturemoves,sometimesmarkedly,overthelandscape. Hence,thepresentlocation
ofproductionofaparticularcropmaynotbeagoodindicationofwhereintheworldthatcropwillbe
growndecadesfromnow. Thisideahasimportantconsequencesforfoodandagriculturalresearch.
Theproductivityperformanceofmanyagriculturaltechnologiesissensitivetolocalagroecological
factors(includingclimate,soils,landslopeandelevation,wind,anddaylength),andsotargetingand
optimizingtechnologiesfortheseagroecologicalrealitiesisadistinctiveaspectofinnovationinfoodand
agriculture. Coupledwiththeinherentlylonglagsfrominitiatingresearchtorealizingimpacts,itmay
wellbefollytoprioritizeinvestmentsonR&Dtacklingaparticularprobleminaparticularcrop(or
livestock)commodityassumingthepresentspatialpatternofproductionwillprevail.
Thefactorsaffectingthelocationofproductionarecomplexandchanging. Moreover,
technologiesthemselvesmayshifttheoptimallocationofagriculturalproduction. Pressuresoutside
agricultureandbeyondconsiderationsofagroecologiesarealsoimportant. Climatechange,for
instance,mayhaveabigbearingontheoptimallocationofproduction,orthetechnicalstrategiesbest
suitedtoadaptingtothesechangesinagivenlocale. Investmentsinruraltransport,coldchain,and
communicationinfrastructurealongwiththechangingspatialpatternsof(ruralvsurban)population
densitiescandemonstrablyaffecttheagriculturallandscape. Thusasmarketaccessimproves,local
productionincentivescanbeskewedtowardhighervalued,perishableproduction(suchasfreshfruits
andvegetables,meatanddairyproducts)andawayfromstapleormoretraditionalfoodcrops.
Likewise,investmentsinirrigation,terracingandotheragriculturallandimprovementscanalterthe
8/6/2019 3568 Pardey Pingali 2010 GCARD Text Figs Tabs 1
11/55
incentivestoproducecertainagriculturalproductsincertainlocations,withsubstantivefollowon
consequencesforR&Dpriorities.7
CroplandMovements
Sowhatevidencedowehaveoftheextentandnatureofthespatialmovementofagricultural
production? Unfortunately,thisaspecthasbeenlittlestudied,butthereisasmallandgradually
growingbodyofevidence,someofwhichisbrieflyintroducedhere. Agriculturetakesupalotofspace:
anestimated40percentoftheworldslandareaispresentlycommittedtocropandlivestock
production(withalmost13percentofthelandbeingincrops). Butthatwasnotalwaysso. Beginning
in1700,agriculturalcroplandoccupiedjust3.5percentoftheworldstotallandarea,withmostofthat
croplandlocatedinAsia(accountingfor48.5percentoftheworldscroppedareaatthattime),Europe
(28.5percent),andAfrica(19.6percent). Notably,thesparselysettledNewWorldsofAustralia,New
Zealand,andtheAmericascollectivelyaccountedforjust3.2percentofthelandworldwideunder
permanentcropsin1700. By2000,theNewWorldsharehadgrownto27.1percentofthetotal
croppedarea.
DrawingonsimulatedSAGEdatadevelopedbyRamankuttyandFoley(1999)andRamnakutty
etal.(2008),Beddowetal.(2010)illustratechangesinthespatialpatternofproductionoverthelong
run. Figure2,Panelsaandbprovidemappedsnapshotsofthelocationofcroppedareain1700and
2000
respectively.
The
net
effect
of
the
movement
of
land
in
and
out
of
cropped
agriculture
means
thatagricultureisgeographicallymobile,asillustratedinFigure2,Panelc,whichusestheSAGEseries
toestimatechangesincroppedareaoverthefourdecadesspanning1960to2000. Itindicatesthe
localizedmovementofacreageinandoutofagriculturesince1960,or,morespecifically,thechange
intheareasharededicatedtocropproductionforeachofthe259,200mappedpixelsforexample,a
valueofminus50percentindicatesthathalftheacreageinthatpixelshiftedoutofcropping
agriculturesince1960. Thedarkertheredshading,thegreaterthepercentdeclineincroppedarea
7Whilegroundingtechnologytargetstolocalproductionconstraintsiscriticallyimportant,thesespatialdynamics
complicatedecisionsaboutwhoseparticularproductionconstraintshavebearing. Isittodaysfarmersgiventodays
productionproblems,ortomorrowsfarmersandtheirprospectiveproblemsthataremostrelevant? Clearlyinsome
casesthetwosetsofproblemsareinessencethesame,butthiswillnotalwaysbeso. Moreover,farmersarenotalways
fullyinformedaboutscientificpotentials,andtotheextentthatlocationandproductionchoicesareendogenously
determinedbytechnicaloptions,scientificopinionisimportantaswell. Forexample,onemightspeculatethattherewas
littleifanyfarmerdemandforsemidwarfnessinwheatorricetechnologies,yettheproductivityboostofthesevarietal
innovationsweregloballytransformative.
8/6/2019 3568 Pardey Pingali 2010 GCARD Text Figs Tabs 1
12/55
perpixel;thedarkerthegreenshading,thegreaterthepercentincreaseincroppedareaperpixel.
ThecollapseoftheformerSovietUnionisevidentintermsofsubstantialdeclinesincroppedarea
throughoutEasternEurope. TheSAGEdataalsoindicatedeclinesincroppedareainpartsofWestern
Europe,northeastern,southern,andsoutheasternUnitedStates,andsignificantpartsofChina.8
TherewasasubstantialincreaseincroppedareasthroughouttheIndochinaPeninsula,Indonesia,
WestAfrica,Mexico,andBrazil. Theoverallpictureisoneofcontractingareaundercropsin
temperateregionsandincreasingcroppedareaintropicalpartsoftheworldduringthelastfour
decadesofthetwentiethcentury.
Figure2,Paneld providesanindicationofthedistanceanddirectionofthespatialrelocation
ofagriculturegloballyoverthelongrunbyplottingthemovementinthecentroidsorcentersof
gravityofproductionbyregionfortheperiodbeginningin1700(wheneachregionscentroidis
centeredonazerolatitudelongitudegridcoordinate)throughto2000. Eachcentroidisanestimate
ofthegeographiccenter(centerofmass)ofthecroppedareainthecorrespondingregion. The
locationofthecentroiditselfisnotparticularlyenlightening,anditcouldeasilybethecasethata
centroidisinalocationthatdoesnotproduceanycropsatall,orisotherwisenotrepresentativeof
thegeneralagriculturalsituationinacountry. However,movementsinthecentroidarerevealingas
anindicationoftheinfluencesofchangingpatternsofsettlement,infrastructure,andtechnologieson
the
location
of
agriculture.
Accordingtothesedata,NorthAmericaandAfricahaveseenthelargestmovementsintheir
productioncentroids,bothshiftingabout1,300kilometersoverthe300yearperiod. Aswasthecase
withtheothercontinents,mostofthismovementoccurredafter1900. However,theyear2000
centroidsforotherregionsmoreorlessrepresentacontinuationofthetrendfrom1950to1992;the
onlyanomalyseemstobeinAfrica,wherealmostallofthemeasuredmovementinitscentroid
occurredbetween1992and2000.9 TheAsiancentroidmovedtheleast,changingbyonly15
kilometersto
the
east
and
137
kilometers
to
the
south.
8Wood,Sebastian,andScherr(2000,p.28)documentthereductionincultivatedlandinChinaduringthefirsthalfofthe
1990s,largelyattributingthistoexpandedindustrialandurbanusesofland.Zhangetal.(2007)implythatthistrend
continuedintoatleasttheearlypartofthetwentyfirstcentury.Forexample,theauthorsestimatethat 260,000haof
Chinesecultivatedlandwasconvertedtononagriculturalusesbetween1991and2001.
9Itseemsmorelikelythattheyear1992and2000datasetswerenotfullyconformablethanthatamassivestructuralshift
inAfricanproductionoccurredduringthisperiod.However,thenorthwardmovementofagricultureinsubSaharanAfrica
8/6/2019 3568 Pardey Pingali 2010 GCARD Text Figs Tabs 1
13/55
ExceptinAfricaandAsia,thegeneraltrendfavoredmovementinlongituderatherthan
latitude.ThepronouncednorthwardmovementinAfricawasalmostmatchedbyanequivalentmove
westward,and,whiletheAsiancentroidshowedmuchmoreabsolutemovementalongtheeastwest
axis,thenetmovementovertheperiodwasalmostduesouth. Averagingacrossalloftheregions,the
netlongitudinalmovementwas4.6timesaslargeasthenetlatitudinalmovement.
MovementofCrops
Sometechnologytargeting,andtheirimpliedagriculturalR&Dinvestmentchoices,areusefully
informedbybroadbrushperspectivesonthespatialmobilityofaggregateagriculturalorcropped
land. ButmanyR&Dinvestmentchoiceshingeonmorerefined,cropspecificsensesofthepresent
andchanginglocationofproduction.
Diggingbeneaththeaggregatecropareasjustdiscussed,whatdoweknowaboutchangesin
thelocationofproductionofindividualcrops,especiallyatagloballevelandforthelengthyperiods
requiredfortechnical(andother)changestohaverealizedtheirfullproductionandproductivity
consequences? AppendixTable1revealsanewlycompiledglobalseriesusedbyBeddow(2010)to
examinecountry andcropspecificproductiontrendsstretchingbacktothe1880s. Thetablereports
thelongrunhistoryofcountryspecificproductionbyperiodandthecorrespondingshareof
production(inbrackets)formaize,wheatandrice. Thetabulationincludesthetopfiveproducersfor
these
three
crops
and
how
those
producers
evolved
over
time
relative
to
other
countries.
If
a
country
appearedasatopproducerforacropinanyparticulartimeperiod,thatproducer'srankand
percentageshareareshownforallreportedtimeperiods. Thuswefind,forexample,thatJapanwas
oncethesecondrankedproducerofrice,buthasfalleninrankandshareoverthelongrunandisno
longeramongthetopfive(aviewthatcannotbeobtainedfrommediumrundatalikethoseavailable
fromFAOSTAT).
Thereareseveralstrikingfeaturesinthesedata. First,measuredglobalproductionhasbeen
spatiallyconcentrated,
especially
for
maize
and
rice.
Since
the
beginning
of
the
20
thCentury,
the
top
twoproducingcountrieshavealwaysaccountedformorethanhalftheglobalproductionofmaize
andrice,andoften7080percentoftheworldproductionoccurredinjustfivecountries. Wheat
isconsistentwiththefindingofLiebenberg,Pardey,andKahn(2010)thatthefarmedareainSouthAfricanagriculture
peakedat91.8millionhectaresin1960,thendeclinedsteadilyto82.2millionhectaresby1996,whereithassincebeen
moreorlessstable.
8/6/2019 3568 Pardey Pingali 2010 GCARD Text Figs Tabs 1
14/55
8/6/2019 3568 Pardey Pingali 2010 GCARD Text Figs Tabs 1
15/55
reducedthedegreedayrequirementsofmaize,allowingfarmerstocompleteaseasonfurthernorth
thanwasotherwisepossible.
In1879,thefirstyearforwhichbothoutputandareadataareavailableatthecountylevelfor
theUnitedStates,therewasaconcentrationofmaizeproductioninthelowermidwest. However,
maizewasproducedfairlyhomogenouslythroughouttheeasternportionsofthecountrysothatin
total,26percentofthecountry'smaizewasproducedintheSoutheastand42percentwasproduced
intheNortheast. By2006,theSoutheasthadlostitsstatusasamajormaizeproducer,whilethe
locusofproductionshiftedtotheNorthCentralregion. Bothtechnologicalandnontechnological
factorsspurredthisrelocation. Someoftheshiftwasmadepossiblebyimprovedtransportation
systems,whichallowedSoutheasterngrowerstoproducemorenonnutritivecropssuchascotton
andtobacco,andlaterbytherapiduptakeofhybridtechnologyintheNorthCentralportionofthe
country.
Thesamespatialprocessesarenodoubtatplayinotherpartsoftheworld,althoughthepace
andspecificsofthelocationalchangeshaveyettobecarefullyassessed. Arguably,therapidpaceof
urbanizationandthepotentialtoradicallyaffecteconomicaccesstomarketsviaimprovementsin
transportationandcommunicationinfrastructurepointstothepossibilityofmajormovementin
Africanagricultureinthedecadesahead. Compoundingthesepressuresforspatialchangein
agriculture
are
the
prospects
of
localized
changes
in
production
potential
attributable
to
changes
in
climate.
2.3 Appropriability
Thepartialpublicgoodnatureofmuchoftheknowledgeproducedbyresearchmeansthat
researchbenefitsarenotfullyprivatelyappropriable. Indeed,themainreasonforprivatesector
underinvestmentinagriculturalR&Disinappropriabilityofsomeresearchbenefits:thefirm
responsiblefordevelopingatechnologymaynotbeabletocapture(i.e.,appropriate)allofthe
benefitsaccruingtotheinnovation,oftenbecausefullyeffectivepatentingorsecrecyisnotpossible
orbecausesomeresearchbenefits(orcosts)accruetopeopleotherthanthosewhousetheresults.
Forcertaintypesofagriculturalresearch,therightstotheresultsarefullyandeffectivelyprotectedby
patentsorotherformsofintellectualpropertyprotection,suchthattheinventorcancapturethe
benefitsbyusingtheresultsfromtheresearchorsellingtherightstousethem;forinstance,the
8/6/2019 3568 Pardey Pingali 2010 GCARD Text Figs Tabs 1
16/55
benefitsfrommostmechanicalinventionsanddevelopingnewhybridplantvarieties,suchashybrid
corn,areappropriable. Often,however,thosewhoinvestinR&Dcannotcaptureallofthebenefits
otherscanfreerideonaninvestmentinresearch,usingtheresultsandsharinginthebenefits
withoutsharinginthecosts.11 Insuchcases,privatebenefitstoaninvestor(orgroupofinvestors)are
lessthanthesocialbenefitsoftheinvestmentandsomesociallyprofitableinvestmentopportunities
remainunexploited. Theupshotisthat,intheabsenceofgovernmentintervention,investmentin
agriculturalresearchislikelytobetoolittle.
Thetypesoftechnologyoftensuitedtolessdevelopedcountryagriculturehavehithertobeen
ofthesortforwhichappropriabilityproblemsaremorepronouncedtypesthathavebeen
comparativelyneglectedbytheprivatesectorevenintherichestcountries. Inparticular,until
recently,privateresearchhastendedtoemphasizemechanicalandchemicaltechnologies,whichare
comparativelywellprotectedbypatents,tradesecrecy,andotherintellectualpropertyrights;andthe
privatesectorhasgenerallyneglectedvarietaltechnologiesexceptwherethereturnsare
appropriable,asforhybridseed. Inlessdevelopedcountries,theemphasisininnovationhasoften
beenonselfpollinatingcropvarietiesanddisembodiedfarmmanagementpractices,whicharethe
leastappropriableofall. Therecentinnovationsinrichcountryinstitutionsmeanthatprivatefirms
arenowfindingitmoreprofitabletoinvestinplantvarieties;thesamemaybetrueinsomeless
developed
countries,
but
not
all
countries
have
made
comparable
institutional
changes.
2.4 R&DSpillovers
Whilethemostimmediateandtangibleeffectofthenewtechnologiesandideasstemmingfrom
researchdoneinonecountryistofosterproductivitygrowthinthatcountry,newtechnologiesand
ideasoftenspilloverandspursizableproductivitygainselsewhereintheworld. Inthepast,low and
middleincomecountriesbenefitedconsiderablyfromtechnologicalspilloversfromhighincome
countries,inpartbecausethebulkoftheworldsagriculturalscienceandinnovationoccurredinrich
countries. AsPardeyandAlston(2010)observed,increasingly,spilloversfromrichcountriesmaynot
11Forinstance,anagronomistorfarmerwhodevelopedanimprovedwheatvarietywouldhavedifficultyappropriating
thebenefitsbecauseopenpollinatedcropslikewheatreproducethemselves,unlikehybridcrops,whichdonot. The
inventorcouldnotrealizeallofthepotentialsocialbenefitssimplybyusingthenewvarietyhimself;butifhesoldthe
(fertile)seedinoneyearthebuyerscouldkeepsomeofthegrainproducedfromthatseedforsubsequentuseasseed.
Hencetheinventorisnotabletoreapthereturnstohisinnovation.
8/6/2019 3568 Pardey Pingali 2010 GCARD Text Figs Tabs 1
17/55
beavailabletodevelopingcountriesinthesamewaysortothesameextentforseveralreasons. First,
richcountryR&Dagendashavebeenreorientedawayfromproductivitygainsinfoodstaplestoward
otheraspectsofagriculturalproduction,suchasenvironmentaleffects,foodquality,andthemedical,
energy,andindustrialusesofagriculturalcommodities. Thisgrowingdivergencebetweendeveloped
countryresearchagendasandtheprioritiesofdevelopingcountriesimpliesthatfewerapplicable
technologieswillbecandidatesforadaptationtodevelopingcountries. Second,technologiesthatare
applicablemaynotbeasreadilyaccessiblebecauseofincreasingintellectualpropertyprotectionof
privatelyownedtechnologiesand,perhapsmoreimportantly,theexpandingscopeandenforcement
ofbiosafetyregulations. Differentapproachesmayhavetobedevisedtomakeitpossiblefor
countriestoachieveequivalentaccesstotechnologicalpotentialgeneratedbyothercountries. Third,
thosetechnologiesthatareapplicableandavailablearelikelytorequiremoresubstantiallocal
developmentandadaptation,callingformoresophisticatedandmoreextensiveformsofscientific
R&Dthaninthepast. Therequirementforlocaladaptiveresearchisalsolikelytobeexacerbatedas
changesinglobalandlocalclimatepatternsaddfurthertotheneedforadaptiveresponsesto
changingagriculturalproductionenvironments. Notwithstandingthesedevelopments,itisimperative
thatbothnationalandinternational(spillover)potentialsbeoptimizedinthedecadesaheadifthe
necessaryglobalproductivitygainsaretoberealized.
Spatial
Spillovers
Analysesofagriculturalproductivitygainshaveshownthatspatialspillinsareamajorsourceof
productivitygains,accountingforuptohalfof localproductivity increases. Thepotentialforspatial
spilloversgoestotheheartoftheconceptionofandraisondtreforinternationalagriculturalR&D,
whetherthatbeconducted inthepublicarena(suchasbyCGIARfundedcenters)orbyregionalor
multilateralprivatefirms. Absentthesespatialspilloversthemarketfailurerationale(and,relatedly,
the size and scope rationale discussed below) for internationally conceived or conducted R&D is
severelycurtailed.
What
do
we
know
about
the
likelihood
for
research
or
technologies
to
spill
from
onecountrytoanother?
Because agricultural production is especially dependent on natural inputs such as soil and
climate conditions which affect the performance of particular crops or production practices, the
degreeofagroecologicalsimilarityaffects thedegree towhichspillinscanbeexploited. Countries
8/6/2019 3568 Pardey Pingali 2010 GCARD Text Figs Tabs 1
18/55
that share agroecological characteristics are likely to have high potential for spilloversi.e.,
technologies or crop varieties developed in one country may be readily adopted in the other.
Similarly,spillinsalsotendtoflowmorereadilyamongcountriesthatproducesimilarcropmixes. On
thecontrary,technologicalspilloverswillbelimitedamongcountriesthataretechnologicallydistant,
ordissimilarintheiragroecologicalcharacteristicsorproductionpatterns.
James, Pardey and Wood (2010) develop and report a range of metrics of the technological
distancebetweencountries. Theirdistancemetricrangesbetweenzeroandoneoneindicatingthat
countriesare technologicalclose (and so thepotential for technologyspilloversarehigh),andzero
indicatingtheyaretechnologicaldistant(with lowornospilloverpotential). InFigure4,distance is
establishedbyassessing thedegreeofconcordance in thecropmixamongcountries. Panela, for
example, shows the concordance in crop area shares for each country relative to a richcountry
averageoftheareasharesplantedtoeachof20crops. Thus,iftheshareofcroppedacreageplanted
toeachof20cropsforaparticularcountrywereidenticaltothecorrespondingareasharesaveraged
among the highincome countries, then the distance metric would take the value 1.0: that is, the
countryinquestionistechnologicalclosetothehighincomecountriesasagroupwhenviewedfrom
theperspectiveofitscroporientation. Byextension,onewouldexpectacountrywhosecropmixis
similar instructuretothemixofcropsproduced inthehighincomecountries,onaverage,tohave
greater
potential
to
capture
technological
spillins
from
the
research
done
in
those
rich
countries.
Figure4,Panelsb, candd report the same cropbaseddistancemetricsusing the croparea
averages forLatinAmerica&Caribbean,AsiaandPacific,andsubSaharaAfrica respectivelyas the
pointof reference. Table1 reports theaveragevaluesof thecropdistancemetric forcountries in
eachregionoftheworldrelativetothesefour,baseregionaverages. Bythismeasure,countries in
subSaharan Africa have comparatively low potential to capture technological spillins from crop
researchdoneintherichcountries(seethedistancemetricvalueof0.40). Onaveragethecropping
patternsinLatin
America
are
closest
to
those
insub
Saharan
Africa,
although
the
concordance
of
crop
mixesisstillquitelowbyinternationalstandards(seethedistancemetricvalueof0.54).
Similarityincropproductionmixisbutonedimensionoftechnologicalcloseness. Eveniftwo
countrieshadsimilarcroppingshares,itmaybethattheagroecologicalconditionsfacingcrop
productioninonecountryaredissimilartothoseinanothercountry,meaningdifferentcropvarieties,
8/6/2019 3568 Pardey Pingali 2010 GCARD Text Figs Tabs 1
19/55
cropmanagementpracticesorinputmixesarerequired. Theseagroecologicaldissimilaritieswould
acttounderminethepotentialforresearchspillovers(or,alternatively,raisethecostsoftheadaptive
researchrequiredtoporttechnologydevelopedinonecountrytoanagroecologicallydissimilarother
country). Figure5parallelsFigure4initsconstruction,butthistimetheagriculturalareasineach
countrywereparsedinto26differentagroecologicalclassesandtheconcordanceamong
agroecologieswasassessed. Mostevidently,countriesthroughoutsubSaharanAfricaaremuchmore
distantfromtherichcountriesonaverageintermsoftheiragroecologiesthantheircropmixes(see
thegenerallylightershadingthatislowerdistancemetricvaluesforsubSaharanAfricainPanelaof
Figure5comparedwithPanelaofFigure4). Infact,theagriculturalareasincountriesthroughout
subSaharanAfricaareagroecologicallyclosesttotheagriculturalareasinLatinAmerica(and,
specifically,Brazil). TheyarealsoreasonablyclosetoareasthroughoutSouthandEastAsia,notably
IndiaandpartsoftheIndoChinapeninsular(seethedarkershadedcountiesinFigure5,Paneld,
wheretheaveragecropecologythroughoutsubSaharanAfricawastakenasthepointofreference
forcalculatingdistancemetrics).
Figure6goesonestepfurthertojointlyevaluatetechnologicaldistanceintermsofthe
agroecologicaldifferencesamongcountieswithinspecificcroppingareas. Herethereference
regionistheagroecologiesfoundinthetopfiveproducingcountriesforeachofthefourincluded
crops;
wheat,
rice,
maize
and
soybean.
Thus,
for
example,
countries
throughout
sub
Saharan
Africa
generallyhavequitedissimilaragroecologiescomparedwiththeagroecologiesfoundinthewheat
growingareasoftheworldsleadingwheatproducers(Figure6,Panela). Incontrast,partsofwest,
northcentralandeasternAfricaareagroecologicallyclosertotheworldsprincipalriceproducers
(Figure6,panelc),suggestingthatricetechnologies(e.g.,newvarietiesorcropmanagement
techniques)emanatingfromtheseimportantriceproducingcountrieshavegreaterpotentialtospillin
topartsofAfrica(orrequirelessadaptiveresearchtorealizetheirspillinpotentials).
Carefulanalysis
of
these
types
of
technological
distance
metrics
could
substantially
fine
tune
our
strategicsenseoftechnologicalspillovers,withsignificantimplicationsforinternationalresearch
collaborationsandtechnologytargetinginvolvingpublicorprivateagencies. Ofcourseotherfactors
canhelporhindertherealizationoftheseresearchspilloverpotentials,suchasopennesstotrade(in
8/6/2019 3568 Pardey Pingali 2010 GCARD Text Figs Tabs 1
20/55
technologies)includingphytosanitaryandbiosafetypolicies,intellectualpropertyrights,andarange
ofmarketrealities.
Disciplinary,AgencyandSectoralSpillovers
LookingforwardforfoodandagriculturalR&D,asharpersenseofspatialspilloverpotentialswill
becriticalformakingmoreinformedstrategicinvestmentandinstitutionalchoices. Butthereare
otherdimensionsofspilloversthatarecriticalaswell. Onedimensionisthe(twoway)spillover
betweenpubliclyandprivatelyperformedR&D. Thisspeakstotheappropriabilityaspectstouchedon
brieflyabove,andareaffectedbythenatureandpracticeofintellectualpropertyrightsandthe
industrialstructureoftheseinnovationmarkets. Another,oftenunderappreciated,aspectof
spilloversinvolvesthetransferofideas,knowhow,andtangibleinnovationsamongdifferentsectors
oftheeconomyanddifferentdisciplinesorfieldsofscientificinquirymoregenerallyconstrued. For
example,innovationsinbiometrics,remotesensing,informatics,imagingtechnologies,plusthebasic
biochemistry,molecularbiology,genomicsandproteomicsciencesareallpivotaltotechnicalprogress
infoodandagriculture,butrarelyconstruedasfoodandagriculturalR&D.12 Forthisreason,
Section3.2belowplacesfoodandagriculturalR&Dinvestmentsinthecontextofglobalpublicand
privatespendingonallthesciences.
2.5 EconomiesofScaleandScopeManytypesofresearchexhibitsignificanteconomiesofscaleorscope,sothatitmakessense
toorganizerelativelylargeresearchinstitutions;butmuchagriculturaltechnologyischaracterizedby
sitespecificity,relatedtoagroecologicalconditions,whichdefinesthesizeoftherelevantmarketina
waythatismuchlesscommoninotherindustrialR&D(AlstonandPardey1999).13 Onewaytothink
ofthisisintermsoftheunitcostsofmakinglocalresearchresultsapplicabletootherlocations(say,
byadaptiveresearch),whichmustbeaddedtothelocalresearchcosts. Suchcostsgrowwiththesize
12
Foranevenmoreconcreteexample,considersignificantpartsofthesciencesupportingadvancesinprecisionagriculture(see,forexample,GebbersandAdamchuck2010)ortheagriboticsresearchunderwayattheDistributed
RoboticsLaboratoryoftheMassachusettsInstituteofTechnology(Economist2009). Theamalgamofvisionsystems,laser
sensors,satellitepositioningandinstrumentationtechnologiesbeingbroughttobearonautomatingcropharvestingand
greenhouseproductionsystemswouldrarelyifeverbecountedasfoodandagriculturalR&D. Likewise,thereis(andhas
longbeen)asignificantinterplaybetweenthehealthandagriculturalsciencesinamyriadofareasincludingepidemiology,
basicmolecularbiology,nutritionsciences,andsoon.
13ForadiscussionofthesescopeandscaleideasinthecontextofagriculturalR&DseePardey,RoseboomandAnderson
(1991),ByerleeandTraxler(2001),andJin,Rozelle,Alston,andHuang(2005).
8/6/2019 3568 Pardey Pingali 2010 GCARD Text Figs Tabs 1
21/55
ofthemarket. Consequently,whileeconomiesofscaleandscopeinresearchmeanthatunitcostsfall
withsizeoftheR&Denterprise,theseeconomiesmustbetradedoffagainstthediseconomiesof
distanceandadaptingsitespecificresults(thecostsoftransportingtheresearchresultsto
economicallymoredistantlocations). Thus,asthesizeoftheresearchenterpriseincreases,unit
costsarelikelytodeclineatfirst(becauseeconomiesofsizearerelativelyimportant)butwill
eventuallyrise(asthecostsofeconomicdistancebecomeevermoreimportant).
Inevaluatingtheneedforandinstitutionalarrangementsconcerninginternationallyconceived
and,possibly,conductedagriculturalR&Ditisimportanttoconsidertheeconomiesofscaleandscope
inknowledgeaccumulationanddissemination. Forinstance,iftechnologicalspilloverscontinuetobe
fairlyavailableandaccessible,astheyhavebeeninthepast,itmightnotmakesenseforsmall,poor,
agrariannationstospendtheirscarceintellectualandothercapitalresourcesinagriculturalscience.
Howeverifspillinsfromdevelopedcountriesdecrease,developingcountrieswillneedtoconduct
moreoftheirownresearch,butmanynationsmaybetoosmalltoachieveanefficientscaleinmany,
ifany,oftheirR&Dpriorityareas. Forexample,40percentoftheagriculturalresearchagenciesin
subSaharanAfricaemployedfewerthanfivefulltimeequivalentresearchersin2000;93percentof
theregionsagriculturalR&Dagenciesemployedfewerthan50researchers. Creativeinstitutional
innovationstocollectivefundandefficientlyconducttheresearchinwaysthatrealizethesescaleand
scope
economies
will
be
crucial.
2.6 ResearchTechnologyRegulationInmanypartsoftheworld,agriculturallyrelatedtechnologiesaresubjecttoanexpanding
rangeofgovernmentregulation,withconsequencesforthenatureandamountofresearcheffortthat
isnowrequiredtorespondtotheseregulatoryrequirements. Theseregulatoryregimescanhave
substantialimplicationsonthepaceandnatureofinnovationandtechnologyreleaseanduptakein
agriculture. Withoutdoubttheyaddtothecostofdevelopinganddeliveringtechnologiestofarmers.
However,comparativelylittle(economic)attentionhasbeengiventostreamliningtheseregulatory
regimes,strivingtomaximizethesocialpayoffstothecostsandcomplianceeffort(onthepartof
8/6/2019 3568 Pardey Pingali 2010 GCARD Text Figs Tabs 1
22/55
technologydevelopers,suppliers,aswellasfarmers)thattheyincur.14 TheUnitedStateshasarguably
donethemostinthisregard(althoughthetechnicalandadministrativecostsofcomplianceinthe
UnitedStatesarehighandrisingandneedcontinuedvigilance),optingforsciencebasedapproval
approachesthatfacilitateinnovationandtechnicalchangewhileseekingtoobjectivelyassessand
managethehumanandenvironmentalrisksassociatedwiththosechanges. However,manypartsof
thedevelopingworldstillhaveinefficientordysfunctionaltechnologyassessment,releaseand
oversightsystems,whetherthatisinreferencetomodernbiotechnologiesorlesscontentious
technologieslikeconventionallybredcropvarieties. Thereareamyriadofreasonsforthese
institutionalfailures,butonekeyaspectisalackoflocaltechnicalexpertisetoconductorevaluate
thenecessaryprereleasetrialsandstewardthetechnologiesoncetheyareinuse. AsPardeyand
Alston(2010)pointedout,loweringthecostsofaccesstothenecessarytechnical(oftenresearch
informed)informationwouldlikelyplayakeyroleinspurringlocalinnovationindevelopingcountries
andfacilitatethetransferinandadaptationoftechnologiesdevelopedelsewhere.
3. R&DandProductivity15Growthindemandforagriculturalcommoditieslargelystemsfromgrowthindemandforfood,whichis
driven by growth in population and per capita incomes (especially the economic growth of the fast
growingeconomiesofAsia),coupledwithnewdemands forbiofuels. Growth insupplyofagricultural
commoditiesisprimarilydrivenbygrowthinproductivity,especiallyasgrowthintheavailabilityofland
and water resources for agriculture has become more constrained. Productivity improvements in
agriculture are strongly associated with lagged R&D spending, as revealed in a large compilation of
countryspecific studies reported in Alston et al. (2000). Thus, the rate of growth of investments in
agriculturalR&Dandtheusestowhichthoseresearchdollarsareputwillbeapivotaldeterminantoflong
termgrowthinthesupply,availability,andpriceoffoodoverthecomingdecades.
3.1
Global
Productivity
Patterns
14See,forexample,Frisvold,HurleyandMitchell(2009),andthearticlestheyintroduce,forasuiteof(economic)analyses
ofanotableandregulatedbioengineeredtechnology;specificallyherbicideresistantcrops. SeealsoJust,Alstonand
Zilberman(2006).15ThissectiondrawsonAlston,BeddowandPardey(2009)andAlston,PardeyandBeddow(2010),whoprovideadditional
informationbeyondthehighlightsincludedhere.
8/6/2019 3568 Pardey Pingali 2010 GCARD Text Figs Tabs 1
23/55
Conventionalmeasuresofproductivitymeasurethequantityofoutputrelativetothequantity
ofinputs. Ifoutputgrowsatthesamepaceasinputs,thenproductivityisunchanged:iftherateof
growthinoutputexceedstherateofgrowthintheuseofinputs,thenproductivitygrowthispositive.
Partialfactorproductivitymeasuresexpressoutputrelativetoaparticularinput(likelandorlabor).16
Multifactorproductivitymeasuresexpressoutputrelativetoamoreinclusivemetricofallmeasurable
inputs(includingland,laborandcapital,aswellasenergy,chemicals,andotherpurchasedinputs).
Measuresofagriculturalproductivitygrowthbetheycropyields,otherpartialfactorproductivity
measures(forexample,measuresoflandandlaborproductivity),orindexesofmultifactor
productivityshowgenerallyconsistentpatternsintermsofsecularshifts,includingindicationsofa
recentslowdowningrowth.
CropYields
Thelongresearchlagsandinherentlyspatialnatureofagriculturalproductionmeansthereis
valueintakinganexplicitlylongtermandgeospatialperspectiveoncropyields. Figure7plotsthe
distributionofaveragenationalcropyieldsworldwideformaize,wheatandriceforselectedperiods
beginninginthemid1800s. Thereareseveralstrikingfeaturesofthesecropyielddistributions. The
rightwardmovementinthemodeofthedistribution(andimplicitlytheaverageaswell)isconsistent
withanincreaseinaveragecropyieldsworldwide. However,thepaceandtimingofthatrightward
shift
occurred
at
different
times
and
at
different
rates
among
the
different
crops,
but
notably,
as
the
centerofgravityofeachdistributionshiftedtotherightthevariancearoundthatcenterofgravity
alsoincreasedinallthreecases. Thusasglobalmeanyieldsgrewovertime,thevariationofyields
amongcountriesalsobecamemorepronounced.
Figure8givesamappedsense(atroughlya10kmby10kmpixelresolution)ofthespatial
variationincropyieldsforthesethreecrops(plussoybeans)in2000. Thelightertheshadingthe
lowerthecropyieldsrelativetothehighestyieldingpixels(indicatedbydarkblue). While37percent
oftheworldsmaizeproductioncomesfromthe20percentofcroppedmaizeareareportingthe
highestyields,only24percentoftheworldssoybeanproductioncomesfromthehighestyielding
areasforthatcrop. However,therewassubstantiallylessspatialvariationinsoybeanyieldsthanin
16Cropyieldsrepresentaparticularpartialproductivitymeasurewhereinthephysicaloutputforaparticularcropis
expressedrelativetolandinput.
8/6/2019 3568 Pardey Pingali 2010 GCARD Text Figs Tabs 1
24/55
cornyields. Theratioofaverageyieldsinthe20percentofareasowntosoybeansreportingthe
highestyieldswas1.76timesgreaterthantheyieldsinthecorresponding20percentofarea
reportingthelowestyields. Formaizetheaverageyieldratiobetweenthehighestandlowestyielding
areaswas4.41.
GlobalannualaverageratesofyieldgrowtharereportedinTable2,whichincludesseparate
estimatesforhigh,middle,andlowincomecountriesandtheworldasawhole,fortwosubperiods:
19611990and19902007. Thereisaslowdownevidentfortheglobalaverage,althoughbeginning
fromcomparativelylowyields,lowincomecountrieshadincreasingratesofgrowthinwheatandrice
yieldssince1990. Thuslowincomecountriesgainedsomegroundsince1990,howevertherebound
inyieldgrowthinthispartoftheworldfailedtofullymakeupforthecomparativelylowgrowthrates
theyexperiencedin19611990. Consequently,significantyieldgapspersists,andasAlston,Pardey
andBeddow(2010)report,thelowincomecountryversusworldrelativitiesofaveragemaize,wheat,
andriceyieldsin2007havefallenbelowthecorresponding1961relativities. Lowincomecountries
hadaveragesoybeanyieldsthatwereabout50percentoftheworldaveragein1961,andthatsame
gappersistedthroughto2007.
Forallfourcommodities,inbothhigh andmiddleincomecountriescollectivelyaccounting
forbetween78.8and99.4percentofglobalproductionofthesecropsin2007
averageannualrates
ofyieldgrowthwerelowerin19902007thanin19611990. Thegrowthofwheatyieldsslowedthe
mostand,forthehighincomecountriesasagroup,wheatyieldsbarelychangedover19902007.
Globalmaizeyieldsgrewatanaveragerateof1.77percentperyearduring19902007comparedwith
2.20percentperyearfor19611990. Likewisericeyieldsgrewatlessthan1.0percentperyearduring
19902007,lessthanhalftheiraveragegrowthratefor19601990. Moreover,theslowdownincrop
yieldsisquitepervasive. Inmorethanhalfofthecountriesthatgrewthesecrops,yieldsforrice,
wheat,maize,andsoybeansgrewmoreslowlyduring19902007thanduring19611990(Table3).
Morecritically,theslowdownwasgenerallymorewidespreadthanamongthetoptenproducing
countriesworldwide.
Theslowdownisalsopervasiveandevenmorepronouncedwhencountriesareaggregatedin
termsofharvestedarea. Lookingattheperiodafter1961,thegrowthinyieldsofwheat,rice,and
soybeansslowedafter1990incountriesaccountingformorethan70percentoftheworlds
8/6/2019 3568 Pardey Pingali 2010 GCARD Text Figs Tabs 1
25/55
harvestedarea;forcornaround65percentofharvestedareawasincountrieswithsloweryield
growthafter1990. LatinAmericaistheonlycontinentwherecountriesaccountingformorethanhalf
theharvestedareaforallfourcropshadyieldsgrowingatmorerapidratesafter1990thanbefore.
Notably,countriesaccountingformorethan90percentoftheharvestedareaamongthehighincome
countriessawthepaceofgrowthofmaizeandriceyieldsslowafter1990,whileallofthehighincome
countrieshadwheatandsoybeanyieldsgrowingataslowerrateinthemorerecentperiod.
LandandLaborProductivity
Movingbeyondcropyieldstomorebroadlyconstruedproductivitymeasures,global
productivitytrendsshowa2.4foldincreaseinaggregateoutputperharvestedareasince1961,
equivalenttoannualaveragegrowthof2.0percentperyear. Accompanyingthisincreaseinland
productivitywasa1.7foldincrease,or1.2percentperyeargrowth,inaggregateoutputper
agriculturalworker(Table4). Theseproductivitydevelopmentsreflectglobalagriculturaloutput
growingrelativelyquicklycomparedwiththegrowthintheuseofagriculturallandandlabor0.3
percentand1.1percentperyear,respectively.
Inparallelwiththeglobalcropyieldevidencepresentedabove,thelongerrungrowthinland
andlaborproductivitymasksawidespreadalbeitnotuniversalslowdownintherateofgrowthof
bothproductivitymeasuresduring19902005comparedwiththepreviousthreedecades. Chinaand
Latin
America
are
significant
exceptions,
both
having
considerably
higher
growth
rates
of
land
and
laborproductivitysince1990. Amongthetop20producingcountriesaccordingtotheir2005valueof
agriculturaloutput,landandlaborproductivitygrowthwassubstantiallyslowerin19902005thanin
19611990oncethelarge,andinmanyrespectsexceptional,caseofChinaissettooneside. After
settingasidethetop20producingcountries,onaverageacrosstherestoftheworld,theslowdownis
evenmorepronounced:forthisgroupofcountries;landproductivitygrewby1.83percentperyear
duringtheperiod19611990,butbyonly0.88percentperyearthereafter;laborproductivitygrewby
1.08percent
per
year
prior
to
1990,
but
barely
budged
during
the
period
1990
2005.
After1990,theglobalgrowthrateoflandproductivityslowedfrom2.03percentperyearto
1.82percentperyear,whereasthegrowthrateoflaborproductivityincreasedfrom1.12percentper
yearfor19611990to1.36percentperyearfor19902005. Onceagaintheseworldtotalsare
distortedbythesignificantandexceptionalcaseofChina. NettingoutChina,globallandandlabor
8/6/2019 3568 Pardey Pingali 2010 GCARD Text Figs Tabs 1
26/55
productivitygrowthhasbeenslowersince1990thanduringthepriorthreedecades. Thesame
periodrelativitiesprevailiftheformerSovietUnion(FSU)isalsonettedout,althoughthemagnitude
oftheglobalproductivityslowdownnetofChinaandtheFSUislesspronouncedbecausebothpartial
productivitymeasuresfortheFSUactuallyshrankafter1990.
Insummarizingtheexistingevidenceonpartialandmultifactorproductivitytrendsin
agricultureworldwide,Alston,BabcockandPardey(2010)concludethat.eventhoughwehave
manyreasonsforbeingcautiousinthisarea,wefinditdifficulttoreachanyconclusionotherthan
thatweareseeingevidenceofaslowdowninglobalagriculturalproductivitygrowth,especiallyinthe
worldsrichestcountries. Comingtoaconsensusonthestructureandextentofaproductivity
slowdownisdifficult,buthelpful. Drawingpolicyimplicationsfromthisevidenceisdoublydifficult.
Alston,BabcockandPardeywentontoobservethattheAustralian[productivity]slowdownhas
beenobservedduringthemostsevereandextendeddroughtinthatcountryshistory. Other
countries,too,mayhavebeenaffectedbyarunofunusuallyfavorableorunfavorableseasons. Andit
ishardalsototellthedifferencebetweensustainedchangesingrowthandthemultiyeareffectsofa
changethatisreallyepisodicinnature(e.g.,themassiveinstitutionalreformsinChinaandtheformer
SovietUnion). Notwithstandingtheproblemsofproductivitymeasurementandinterpretation,the
apparentandapparentlypervasiveslowdowndoesraisequestionsastowhetherthecurrentglobal
investment
in
agricultural
R&D
will
be
sufficient
to
enable
the
development
of
innovations
and
productivitysuchthatagriculturalsupplywillgrowfastenoughtokeeppacewiththeinevitable
growthindemand. ItistotheR&Dinvestmentevidencethatwenowturn.
3.2 R&DPatterns17
In2000,globalinvestmentinfoodandagriculturalR&Dtotalled$36.2billion(2005prices).18
Around67percentoftheresearchwasperformedbypublicagencies,andtheremaining33percent
byfirmsinthefood(processing,transport,andstorage),beverage,chemical,andmachinerysectors
17TheresearchanddevelopmentestimatesreportedheredrawinpartfromestimatesmadebyDehmerandPardey
(2010)andPardeyandChanKang(2010)thatarestillconsideredpreliminary. TheyexcludetheFormerSovietUnionand
EasternEuropeancountriesduetolackofdata.
18 Year2000isthelastyearforwhichinternationallycomparabledataonagriculturalR&Dinvestmentsarepresently
available. Thesedatawereconvertedtointernationaldollarsusingpurchasingpowerparity(PPP)indexes. UsingPPPsto
convertlocalcurrenciestoanumerairecurrencyresultsinsignificantlylargersharesoftheglobalresearchtotalbeing
attributedtolowerincomecountriesthanifmarketexchangerateswereusedforthecurrencyconversion.
8/6/2019 3568 Pardey Pingali 2010 GCARD Text Figs Tabs 1
27/55
servicingfoodandagriculture. Figure9,Panelabreaksdownthepublicplusprivatefoodand
agriculturalR&Dspendingaccordingtothehighincomeandlow andmiddleincomecountrieswhere
thisresearchisperformed. Almost70percentofthatpublicandprivateresearchtookplaceinhigh
incomecountries,andaroundhalftherichcountryresearchwasconductedbyprivatefirms. In
contrast,foodandagriculturalresearchconductedinlowandmiddleincomecountrieswas
overwhelminglycarriedoutbypublicagencies(privatefirmsaccountedforjustover6percentofthe
estimated$10.8billionspentonfoodandagriculturalR&Dinthesecountries).
PublicspendingonagriculturalR&Dishighlyconcentrated,withthetopfivepercentofcountries
inthedataset(i.e.,6countriesinatotalof129)accountingforapproximatelyhalfofthespending. The
UnitedStatesaloneconstitutedaround16percentofglobalspendingonpubliclypreformedagricultural
research. TheAsiaandPacificregionhascontinuedtogainground,accountingforaneverlargershare
oftheworldanddevelopingcountrytotalsince1981(20.3percentoftheworldtotalin2000,upfrom
12.5percentin1981). In2000,justtwocountriesfromthisregion,ChinaandIndia,accountedfor29.1
percentofallexpenditureonpublicagriculturalR&Dbydevelopingcountries(andmorethan14
percentofpublicagriculturalR&Dglobally),asubstantialincreasefromtheir15.6percentcombined
sharein1981. Instarkcontrast,subSaharanAfricacontinuedtolosegrounditssharefellfrom17.9
percentofthetotalinvestmentinpublicagriculturalR&Dbydevelopingcountriesin1981to12.2
percent
in
2000.
Private
spending
is
also
geographically
concentrated
with
around
72
percent
of
the
worldsprivatefoodandagriculturalR&Dconductedinjust5countries.
ThesignificantinterdisciplinaryandcrosssectoralspilloversbetweenfoodandagriculturalR&D
andresearchdonebyothersciencesandinothersectorsindicatesthatameaningfulappreciationofthe
sourcesofinnovationinfoodandagriculturemustbecognizantofthemagnitudeandchangingnature
oftotalinvestmentsinR&D. Figure9,Panelb,showsthatin2000,foodandagriculturallyorientedR&D
accountedforonly5percentoftheestimated$782.7billioninvestedinallformsofR&Dworldwide
(increasingto
$970.6
billion
in2006).
Collectively,
the
high
income
countries
(whose
average
per
capita
incomesexceeded$11,906)accountedfor85percentoftheworldsR&Dspendingin2000(80percent
in2006). Thedevelopingcountryshareoftheworldtotalhasgrownovertimefrom5percentin1980
to15percentin2006(DehmerandPardey2010). Notably,China,IndiaandBrazilaccountforagrowing
8/6/2019 3568 Pardey Pingali 2010 GCARD Text Figs Tabs 1
28/55
andnowdominantshareofthisdevelopingcountrytotal61percentofthedevelopingworldstotal
R&Dspendingin1980,increasingto83percentin2006.
ThedynamicsbetweenfoodandagriculturalR&Dandsciencespendinggenerallyarelikelyto
continuechanginginfutureyears,mostnotablyforthoselow andmiddleincomecountrieswith
growingsciencesectors. Figure10showsthatforthepastseveraldecadesatleast,spendingonfood
andagriculturalR&Dinhighincomecountrieshasbeenlessthan5percentoftotalsciencespending.
Onaverage,researchdirectedtowardfoodandagriculturalR&Dinthelow andmiddleincome
countrieswasaround20percentofthetotal(publicandprivate)researchconductedinthatpartofthe
worldduringthe1980s,butbythemid1990sthatsharestartedtodeclineandnowaveragesnearer10
percent.
Therecontinuestobeahugegapbetweenrichandpoorcountriesintermsoftheintensitywith
whichtheyinvestinfoodandagriculturalR&D. Figure11,Panela,showsthatthepublicagricultural
researchintensity(ARI)forlow andmiddleincomecountriesbarelybudgedduringthe1980sand
1990sandwaslessthanhalfthecorrespondingrichcountryfigureduringthisperiod. Moreover,the
intensitywithwhichhighincomecountriesinvestinfoodandagriculturalR&Dhastrendedupwards
sincethe1970s;andaveraged$2.95ofR&Dspendingforevery$100ofagriculturalGDPduringthe
period20002007. Theintensitygapbetweenricherandpoorercountriesisevenmorepronouncedin
terms
of
public
plus
private
spending
(Figure
11,
Panel
b).
Onaverage,theprivateshareoftotalfoodandagriculturalR&Dinrichcountieshastrended
upwardsfromaround36percentintheearly1970sto50percentin2007(Figure12,Panela). About60
percentofthisresearchrelatestofoodprocessingandbeverageproducts,ratherthanchemical,
biologicalandmachineryrelatedR&Dthathelpsspurfarmproductivity. Infact,researchintendedto
maintainorenhancefarmproductivityhasbeenagenerallydecliningshareofpubliclyperformedR&D
intheUnitedStates(wheredatawereavailabletoassessthistrend)(Figure11,Panelb). By2006,less
than57
percent
of
all
R&D
conducted
by
the
state
agricultural
experiment
stations
had
afarm
productivityorientation. IndicationsarethatthisU.S.trendmirrorsdevelopmentsinotherhighincome
countries.
Notonlyhasrichcountryresearchshiftedawayfromproductivityorientedendeavors,the
overallrateofgrowthofreal(i.e.,inflationadjusted)spendinghassloweddramatically;fromaround3
8/6/2019 3568 Pardey Pingali 2010 GCARD Text Figs Tabs 1
29/55
percentperyearduringthe1970stobarely1peryearforthepastseveraldecades(Figure13). While
therateofgrowthofspendinginlow andmiddleincomecountriesishigher,ittoohassuccessively
slowed,atleastuntiltheendofthe1990s. Ifthesespendingtrendspersist,itraisesrealquestionsasto
whetherthegrowthinagriculturalproductivityrequiredtosustainablymeetbasicfoodrequirementsin
thedecadesaheadwillberealized.
4. TheWayForwardLinkingGlobalR&DtoNationalNeeds19Thedemandfor(public)internationalagricultureresearch(IAR)continuestobestrong. Moreover,as
thecostsofinternationalcollaborationdecline(astravelandcommunicationscostsfall)andscaleand
scopeeconomiesbecomemoreprominent,supplysidedevelopmentswillcontinuetopushformore
notlessIAR. TheroleandcontributionsofIARtodevelopingcountryagriculturewillvarysignificantly
amongcountriesaccordingtotheirrespectivestageofdevelopmentandthesize,structureand
sophisticationoftheirnationalsciencecapacities. Forcountriesatthelowendofthestructural
transformationprocess,mostlycountriesinsubSaharanAfrica,thetraditionalfocusonfoodstaples
willcontinuetobeespeciallyimportant. Broadbasedproductivitygainsinstaplecropscanhavefar
reachingimpactsontheruralpoor(BinswangerandMcCalla2010). Thetaskcontinuestobedaunting
giventheheterogeneityofcropsandproductionenvironments,substantialexposuretoclimaterisks
(whichmaygetworse),historicallyandcontinuinglylowlevelsofinvestmentininfrastructureand
agricultureresearchcapacity,andapoorenablingenvironmentforenhancingproductivitygrowth.
Foremergingeconomies,ontheotherhand,IARcouldcapitalizeonthegrowingstrengthofnational
publicinstitutionsandprivatefirmsthatinvestintechnologygenerationanddeliveryandfocusits
effortsinareaswhereitcanprovideuniqueinternationalpublicgoods. Inthecaseoffavorable
productionenvironments,prebreedingmaterialsforshiftingyieldfrontiersforthemajorstaples,
managingtransboundarypests,andsustainingintensiveproductionsystems,aresomeoftheareas
whereinternationalagricultureR&Dcouldcontinuetobeanimportantandcosteffectiveoption.
Focusedresearchonstressproneenvironments(forexample,droughtandhightemperature)may
alsohaveimportantinternationalresearchcomponents..
ThesupplyofpubliclyprovidedIARtodevelopingcountryresearchprogramsishowever,
becomingincreasinglyconstrainedbyvariabledonorsupport,agrowingdisconnectwithprivate
19ThissectiondrawsonPingali(2009).
8/6/2019 3568 Pardey Pingali 2010 GCARD Text Figs Tabs 1
30/55
sectorpriorities,apushtowardsdownstreamproductadaptationanddisseminationactivitiesrelative
toinnovationandproductdevelopment,andalackofclearlinksbetweeninternationalpublicgood
researchandnationalagriculturedevelopmentpriorities. Countryleveldonorcoordinationand
alignmentmechanisms,asspecifiedintheParisDeclarationonAidEffectiveness,donotexplicitly
accountfortheroleofinternationalagricultureresearchinthedevelopmentprocess. Thissection
presentssomeoptionsforrebuildingsynergiesbetweeninternationalpublicgoodresearchand
nationalagriculturedevelopmentpriorities.
FindingSynergiesbetweenPublicandPrivateR&D
Asdocumentedabove,privatesectorinvestmentinagricultureR&Dhasincreasedinrichcountries
andfortheincreasinglymarketorientedpartsoftheproductionsystemsinemergingeconomies.
Largemultinationalcorporationspartneringwithnationalagribusinessfirmsarebecomingaviable
alternativetopublicsectortechnologydelivery,mostnotablyinthecaseofhighvalueagriculture
(cotton,vegetables,andlivestock),hybridsofstaplecropssuchasmaize,andpestanddisease
managementandmachinerytechnologies. Postfarmprocessingtechnologiesarealsolargelyinthe
privaterealmandmakinginroadsinselectedemergingmarkets. Theabilitytocapturetherentsfrom
agricultureR&Dinvestments,throughtheuseofintellectualpropertyrightsandothermeanshas
increasedtheprivatepresenceininnovationintensivemarketsrelatedtofoodandagriculture,but
only
in
certain
segments
of
those
markets
and
with
an
emphasis
on
certain
countries
(Pingali
and
Traxler2002;PardeyandAlston2010). Thisexpandedprivatepresencehasoccurredatthesame
timeasgrowthinpublicR&Dspendinghasstalledorstumbled,shiftingtheoveralltrajectoryof
innovationinfoodandagriculturefurtherinthedirectionofcommercialfarmerswithsignificant
productivitygrowthpotentialandincreasinglyintegratingproductionagriculturewiththerapidshifts
inpostfarmfoodprocessingandmarketingoperations.20 Thispresentsadilemmaforthenational
andinternationalnonprofitsectorshouldtheyusetheprivatesectortoleveragetheirown
investmentsinbreadbasket
areas
or
should
they
redeploy
resources
to
protect
poor
farmers
growingorphancropsinmarginalareasfromdeterioratingtermsoftrade? Whileoneperspectiveis
thatpublicresearchshouldemphasizetheinterestsofmarginalfamers,therecentcrisishasbrought
20 Notablehereistherapidriseofsupermarketsinmanydevelopingcounties,aswellastheincreaseddemandforfood
consumedawayfromthehomeandconveniencefoodsconsumedinthehomeaspercapitaincomesriseforcertain
segmentsofcertainmarkets,particularlyinAsiaandLatinAmerica.
8/6/2019 3568 Pardey Pingali 2010 GCARD Text Figs Tabs 1
31/55
renewedappreciationoftheeffectivenessofR&Dasaninstrumenttomoderateupwardpressureon
staplefoodcommodityprices. Thismayencouragegovernmentstoreorientresourcestoward
productive,commercialfarmerswiththegreatestpotentialimpactonmoderatingfoodprices
(althoughtheevidencefrompastspikesinglobalfoodpricesisthatthesetypesofresponseshave
beenshortlived).
Anenablingpolicyenvironmentthatincludesappropriateintellectualpropertyprotection,
reducedtradebarriers,andatransparentbiosafetyprocedurewillleadtofurtherprivateresearch
investmentsforcommercialproductionsystemsintheemergingeconomies. However,many
developingcountries,especiallyinsubSaharanAfrica,remainoutsidetheorbitofprivatesector
interests. Theprivatesectorisalsounlikelytoinvestmuchinresearchfortraditionalcropsgrowingin
especiallydifficultenvironments,suchasdroughtprevalentorhightemperatureenvironments,even
intransformingeconomies.21 Theprivatesectorsrecordindeliveringnaturalresourcemanagement
(NRM)technologiesisalsolimited,eveninadvancedcountryagriculture. Publicresearchinvestments
couldbejudiciouslyandcreativelydeployedtoleverageprivatetechnologydevelopmentanddelivery
capacitiestohelpmeettheneedsofthepoor(FAO2004).
ChangingAidArchitecture
Thenatureofoverallaidsupplytodevelopingcountrieshasbeenchangingdramaticallyoverthepast
decade
in
terms
of
the
quantities
provided,
the
plurality
of
funding
sources,
and
donor
coordination
andalignmentmechanisms. ThesechangeshavesignificantimplicationsforthewayIARisconducted
andtransferredtodevelopingcountries. ArecentOverseasDevelopmentInstitute(ODI)report
indicatesthattotalaidvolumeshaverisenfromaround$60billionperyearinthe1990stoaround
$100billionin2005andareanticipatedtoriseto$130billionby2010(BurallandMaxwell2006).
AveragedacrossOECDcountries,overseasdevelopmentassistance(ODA)asapercentageofgross
nationalincomehasrisenbackto0.33in2006afterhavingdroppedtoalowof0.22in1997
(OECD/DAC2006).
New
donor
countries,
such
as
China,
India,
Korea,
as
well
as
private
foundations
(suchastheGatesFoundation)andmultilateralfunds(GEF),haveaddedtotheoverallaidtotals.
21Thisiscertainlynottoarguethattheprivatesectorwillnecessarilyignoresuchresearch. Witness,forexample,the
partnershipbetweenCIMMYT,MonsantoCorporationandmanyotherstodevelopwaterefficientmaizevarietiesfor
Africansmallholderfarmers(seewww.monsanto.com/droughttolerantcorn/WEMA.asp).
8/6/2019 3568 Pardey Pingali 2010 GCARD Text Figs Tabs 1
32/55
Growthinthevolumeofaid,thenumberofdonors,andmultiplicityofagendashasspurredcallsfor
greatercoordinationandalignmentofdonorsupportatthecountrylevel.
TheParisDeclarationonAidEffectiveness,sponsoredbytheDevelopmentAssistance
Committee(DAC)oftheOECD,hasbeenasignificantstepinthedirectionofenhancingdonor
coordination. Donorswhosignedontothedeclarationagreedtofollowgovernmentplansand
priorities(alignment)andtoworktogetherinthatprocess(harmonization). TheParisDeclaration
emphasizesbudgetsupporttopriorityprogramsatthecountrylevelratherthansupportfordiscrete
projectsthatmayormaynotbepartofthegovernmentplansandpriorities.
Dotheaboveeffortscontributetothepromotionoftransnationalpublicgoodresearchand
strengthentheR&Dpipelineforfarmlevelimpact? Thereareseveralreasonstobeconcerned. First,
therearenoobviousmechanismsfornationalplansandprioritiestoberesponsivetoemergingglobal
agricultureR&Dopportunities. Second,nationalprioritiestendtofocusondownstream,highly
adaptiveactivities,ratherthaninternationalpublicgoodresearch. Third,scaleeconomiesin
technologygenerationmaybelostifcountriesembarkonunnecessarilyduplicativeeffortsaround
similarproblems. Fourth,theCGIARitselfhasmovedmoredownstream(playingadevelopmentrole)
inseveralcountriesinresponsetodonorsupportforcountryspecificactivities,weakeningits
traditionalroleasasourceofinternationalR&Dspillovers. Finally,currentparalleleffortstowards
increased
harmonization
of
IAR
(including
the
CGIAR
reform)
do
not
take
into
account
donor
efforts
to
alignwithandsupportnationalplansandpriorities. So,whilethemovementtowardsnational
ownershipofdevelopmentagendasanddonoralignmentaroundthemisunquestionablygood,an
unintendedconsequencecouldbeadisruptionintheR&Dpipelinethatsuppliespublicgoodresearch
andtechnologiesforenhancingproductivitygrowthindevelopingcountryagriculture. Thelonglags
inherentinmovingfromR&Dinputstothetechnologiestakenupbyfarmersmakestheebbandflow
(andfaddishness)ofdonorfundingespeciallyproblematic.
Technology
Demand
AssessmentBeyond
Farmers
Voices
Muchofthediscussiononassessingtechnologydemandandpreferenceshasfocusedatthe
communitylevelusingavarietyofparticipatorymethods(seePingali,RozelleandGerpacio2001;
McIntyreetal.2009). Farmerassociationshavealsobeeninvolvedinmakingdecisionsonthe
allocationofresearchfunds,asintheYaquiValleyofMexico. Elicitingfarmervoiceinprioritysetting
8/6/2019 3568 Pardey Pingali 2010 GCARD Text Figs Tabs 1
33/55
isimportantatthemoreappliedandadaptiveendoftheresearchpipelineandforelicitinglocal
preferencesontechnologydesign. However,aggregatingacrossfarmerpreferencesandeliciting
informationonstrategic,longertermresearchprioritiesischallengingifthereisanexclusivereliance
onparticipatorymethods.
Thereareotheremergingtoolsandapproachesthatcanhelpassesstechnologydemandat
thenationalandregionallevelandbeaffectivelyusedbytheinternationalagricultureresearch
communityforsettingprioritiesandtargetingitsglobalpublicgoodresearchefforts. TheWorld
BanksLivingStandardsMeasurement(LSMS)groupisembarkingonamassivehouseholdpanel
surveyacrosssubSaharanAfrica,withafocusonruralhouseholds. Thisnationallyrepresentative
householdsurveywillprovideawealthofinformationonthestateofAfricanfarmingsystems,
technologyuse,andconstraintstoenhancingproductivitygrowth. TheLSMSdatacanbeinvaluable
ingeneratinganalysisanddiscussionsonnationallevelresearchprioritiesandtechnologydemands.
SincetheLSMSsurveysarestandardizedacrosscountries,aggregationatregionallevelsisalso
possible,hencetheabilitytoderivetransnationalresearchdemands. TheHarvestChoicedata
platformbeingjointlydevelopedbyIFPRIandtheUniversityofMinnesotaandawholeraftof
collaboratorsprovidesspatiallydisaggregateddataonavarietyofvariablesthatareimportantfor
assessingtechnologydemand.22 Agroclimatic,biophysicalandsocioeconomicdatacanbeoverlaidto
identify
priority
constraints
at
the
sub
national,
national
and
regional
levels,
and
to
target
technology
diffusionappropriately. TheHarvestChoiceplatformallowsforanexanteassessmentofpotential
technologyinterventionsatthenationalandsubnationallevels. InformationfromtheHarvestChoice
analysiscanbeusedforanexanteassessmentofpotentialtechnologiesatthegloballevelandover
timebyusingIFPRIsIMPACTmodelwhichisalsobeingrevampedtobetterservethisrole. The
challengeliesinincorporatingtheseimprovedanalyticaltoolsintotheshiftingpoliticaleconomies
thatshape(strategic)prioritiesforinternationalagriculturalresearch.
Improving
the
Links
between
International
R&D
and
National
Strategies
Thechallengeforthenewaidarchitectureistocreatemechanismsthatimprovethelinksbetween
internationalR&Dandnationalagriculturedevelopmentstrategies. Evenwithinacountry,the
processforidentifyingtechnologyneedsandprioritizingthemforbudgetsupportisdifficultand
22Formoredetailsseewww.HarvestChoice.org.
8/6/2019 3568 Pardey Pingali 2010 GCARD Text Figs Tabs 1
34/55
uncertain,andR&Dcontinuestobeundervaluedinnationalstrategiesanddonorpriorities. More
thantwodecadesago,VernonRuttanbroachedtheideaofformingNationalResearchSupport
Groupstohelpassessandprioritizeresearchdemandsandchampiontheirsupplyatthenational
level(Ruttan1987). Thesesupportgroupscouldalsobeaconduitforbetterlinkingnationaland
internationalR&D. DataandanalysisgeneratedthroughtheLSMS,HarvestChoiceandother
initiativesdiscussedabovecouldstrengthentheabilityofnationalresearchgroupstoidentifypriority
problemsandtoidentifypotentialsolutionsontheglobalR&Dpipeline,andcoordinatetheir
adaptationanddiffusionatthenationallevel. Finally,theresearchsupportgroupscouldachievea
regionalandcontinentalvoicebyworkingcollectivelyinregionalgroupingssuchastheSouthern
AfricanDevelopmentCommunity(SADC)orECOWAS,theEconomicCommunityforWestAfrican
StatesandwithglobalalliancessuchasGFAR.
8/6/2019 3568 Pardey Pingali 2010 GCARD Text Figs Tabs 1
35/55
References
Alston,J.M.,B.BabcockandP.G.Pardey.Summary,Synthesis,andConclusion.Chapter15inJ.M.Alston,B.
BabcockandP.G.Pardey,eds.TheShiftingPatternsofAgriculturalProductionandProductivityWorldwide,
CARDMATRICElectronicBook,Ames:IowaStateUniversity,2010(inpress).
Alston,J.M.,P.G.PardeyandJ.M.Beddow.GlobalPatternsofCropYieldsandOtherPartialProductivityMeasuresandPrices.Chapter3inJ.M.Alston,B.BabcockandP.G.Pardey,eds.TheShiftingPatternsof
AgriculturalProductionandProductivityWorldwide,CARDMATRICElectronicBook,Ames:IowaState
University,2010(inpress).
Alston,J.M.,M.A.Andersen,J.S.James,andP.G.Pardey.PersistencePays:U.S.AgriculturalProductivityGrowth
andtheBenefitsfromPublicR&DSpending.NewYork:Springer,2010.
Alston,J.M.,J.M.Beddow,andP.G.Pardey.AgriculturalResearch,Productivity,andFoodPricesintheLong
Run.Science325(4)(September2009):12091210.
Alston,J.M.,J.M.BeddowandP.G.Pardey.MendelversusMalthus:ResearchProductivityandFoodPricesin
theLongRun.DepartmentofAppliedEconomicsStaffPaperNo.P0901,StPaul,UniversityofMinnesota,
January2009(revisedSeptember2009).
Alston,J.M.,S.DehmerandP.G.Pardey.InternationalInitiativesinAgriculturalR&D:TheChangingFortunesof
theCGIAR.Chapter12inP.G.Pardey,J.M.Alston,andR.R.Piggott,eds.AgriculturalR&DintheDeveloping
World:TooLittle,TooLate?WashingtonD.C.:InternationalFoodPolicyResearchInstitute,2006.
Alston,J.M.,M.C.Marra,P.G.Pardey,andT.J.Wyatt.AMetaAnalysisofRatesofReturntoAgriculturalR&D:Ex
PedeHerculem?IFPRIResearchReportNo113.WashingtonD.C.:InternationalFoodPolicyResearchInstitute,
2000.
Beddow,J.M.AnEconomicPerspectiveontheSpatialDynamicsofU.S.CropProductionandYields.Department
ofAppliedEconomics,UnpublishedPhDDissertation.St.Paul:UniversityofMinnesota,2010(inpreparation).
Beintema,N.M.andGJStads.MeasuringAgriculturalResearchInvestments:ARevisedGlobalPicture.ASTI
BackgroundNote.WashingtonD.C.:InternationalFoodPolicyResearchInstitute,October2008.
Binswanger,H.P.,andA.McCalla.TheChangingContextandProspectsforAgricultureandRuralDevelopment
inAfrica.Chapter70inP.L.PingaliandR.E.Evenson,eds.HandbookofAgriculturalEconomics,VolumeIV.
Amsterdam:ElsevierPress,2010.
Burall,S.andS.Maxwell.ReformingtheInternationalAidArchitecture:OptionsandtheWayForward.
WorkingPaper278.London:ODI,2006.
Byerlee,D.,andG.Traxler.TheRoleofTechnologySpilloversandEconomiesofSizeintheEfficientDesignof
AgriculturalResearchSystems.Chapter9inJ.M.Alston,P.G.Pardey,andM.J.Taylor,eds.Agricultural
SciencePolicy:ChangingGlobalAgendas,Baltimore:JohnsHopkinsUniversityPress,2001.
ChanKang,CandP.G.Pardey.ACenturyofWheatVarietalInnovationintheUnitedStates:AnEmpirical
Assessment.DepartmentofAppliedEconomics.St.Paul:UniversityofMinnesota,2010(inpreparation).
8/6/2019 3568 Pardey Pingali 2010 GCARD Text Figs Tabs 1
36/55
Dehmer,S.andP.G.Pardey.PrivateAgriculturalR&DintheUnitedStates,19502006.DepartmentofApplied
EconomicsStaffPaper.StPaul:UniversityofMinnesota,2010(inpreparation).
Economist.2009AgriculturalRobotsFieldsofAutomation,December10,2009.
Evenson,R.E.andD.Gollin.AssessingtheImpactoftheGreenRevolution,19602000.Science300(May
2003):758762.
FAO(FoodandAgricultureOrganizationoftheUnitedNations).HungerontheRise:SoaringPricesAdd75
MillionPeopletoGlobalHungerRolls.FAOBriefingPaper.Rome:FAO,September2008.Availableat
http://www.fao.org/newsroom/common/ecg/1000923/en/hungerfigs.pdf.AccessedNovember2008c.
____.MorePeopleThanEverAreVictimsofHunger.FAOPressRelease.Rome:FAO,June2009.Availableat
http://www.fao.org/fileadmin/user_upload/newsroom/docs/Press%20release%20juneen.pdf.AccessedJune
2009.
Frisvold,G.B.,T.M.HurleyandP.D.Mitchell.Overview:HerbicideResistantCropsDiffusion,Benefits,Pricing
andResistanceManagement.AgBioForum12(2&3)(2009):244248.
Gebbers,R.andV.I.Adamchuk.PrecisionAgricultureandFoodSecurity.Science327(February2010):828
831.
Griliches,Z.HybridCorn:AnExplorationintheEconomicsofTechnologicalChange.Econometrica25(1957):
501522.
Herdt,R.W.andC.Capule.Adoption,SpreadandProductionimpactofModernRiceVarietiesinAsia.LosBanos:
InternationalRiceResearchInstitute,1983.
IDA.AidArchitecture:AnOverviewoftheMainTrendsinOfficialDevelopmentAssistanceFlows.
InternationalDevelopmentAssociation.ResourceMobilization(FRM),2007.
James,J.S.,P.G.PardeyandS.Wood.TechnologicalDistance,InternationalSpillovers,andStocksof
AgriculturalKnowledge.DepartmentofAppliedEconomicsStaffPaper.StPaul:UniversityofMinnesota,2010,
(inpreparation).
Just,R.E.,J.M.AlstonandD.Zilberman,eds.RegulatingAgriculturalBiotechnology:EconomicsandPolicy.New
York:SpringerVerlag,2006..
Jin,S.,S.Rozelle,J.M.Alston,andJ.Huang.EconomiesofScaleandScopeandtheEconomicEfficiencyof
ChinasAgriculturalResearchSystem.InternationalEconomicReview46(3)(August2005):10331057.
Liebenberg,F.,P.G.PardeyandM.Khan.SouthAfricanAgriculturalResearchandDevelopment:ACenturyof
Change.StaffPaperP1001.St.Paul:UniversityofMinnesota,DepartmentofAppliedEconomics,January
2010.
McIntyre,B.D.,H.R.Herren,J.WakhunguandR.T.Watson.InternationalAssessmentofAgriculturalKnowledge,
ScienceandTechnologyforDevelopment.WashingtonD.C:IslandPress,2009.
Pardey,P.G.andC.ChanKang.PublicandPrivateFoodandAgriculturalResearchInvestmentTrends:
UnpublishedDataFiles.St.Paul:DepartmentofAppliedEconomics,UniversityofMinnesota,2010(in
preparation).
8/6/2019 3568 Parde