: Julian M. Alston, Matthew A. Andersen, Jennifer S. James, Philip G. Pardey
: Persistence Pays U.S. Agricultural Productivity Growth and the Benefits from Public R&D Spending
: Springer-Verlag
: 9781441906588
: 1
: CHF 189.50
:
: "Landwirtschaft, Gartenbau; Forstwirtschaft, Fischerei, Ernährung"
: English
: 504
: Wasserzeichen/DRM
: PC/MAC/eReader/Tablet
: PDF
gricult ral science policy in the United States has profoundly affected the growth and development of agriculture worldwide, not just in the A United States. Over the past 150 years, and especially over the second th half of the 20 Century, public investments in agricultural R&D in the United States grew faster than the value of agricultural production. Public spending on agricultural science grew similarly in other more-developed countries, and c- lectively these efforts, along with private spending, spurred agricultural prod- tivity growth in rich and poor nations alike. The value of this investment is seldom fully appreciated. The resulting p- ductivity improvements have released labor and other resources for alternative uses—in 1900, 29. 2 million Americans (39 percent of the population) were - rectly engaged in farming compared with just 2. 9 million (1. 1 percent) today— while making food and fiber more abundant and cheaper. The benefits are not confined to Americans. U. S. agricultural science has contributed with others to growth in agricultural productivity in many other countries as well as the Un- ed States. The world’s population more than doubled from around 3 billion in 1961 to 6. 54 billion in 2006 (U. S. Census Bureau 2009). Over the same period, production of important grain crops (including maize, wheat and rice) almost trebled, such that global per capita grain production was 18 percent higher in 2006.

Foreword by Norman Borlaug8
Acknowledgments12
Contents15
Tables18
Figures23
Boxes27
Part I Context28
1 Introduction29
2 A Brief History of U.S. Agriculture35
2.1 Trends in Agricultural Output35
Geography of U.S. Production36
Input versus Output Trends39
2.2 Farms and Farmers42
2.3 Conclusion47
Part II Inputs, Outputs and Productivity48
3 Agricultural Inputs49
3.1 Overview49
General Developments49
More Detailed Developments52
3.2 The Composition of Capital57
3.3 The Composition of Labor63
3.4 The Composition of Land68
3.5 Other Inputs70
Materials70
Biological Inputs73
Natural Inputs74
3.6 Factor Proportions, Relative Prices and Cost Shares74
3.7 Conclusion78
4 Agricultural Outputs81
4.1 Value, Composition and Location of Production81
Longer-Term Trends81
Composition and Value of Agricultural Production, 1949–200682
The Changing Location of Production86
Specialization of States in Agricultural Production89
4.2 Indexes of the Quantity and Price of Output93
Trends over Space and Time93
4.3 Conclusion98
5 Agricultural Productivity Patterns110
5.1 Partial Factor Productivity Measures111
Crop Yields112
Livestock “Yields”114
Land, Labor, Capital, and Materials Productivity115
Labor Requirements122
5.2 Multi-Factor Productivity Measures123
Earlier Productivity Evidence for the United States124
InSTePP Estimates128
5.3 A Systematic Slowdown in Productivity Growth?133
Crop Yields137
Other Partial- and Multi-Factor Productivity Measures137
5.4 Conclusion143
APPENDIX II150
The InSTePP Production Accounts150
Variable Description151
Aggregating Inputs and Outputs152
Major Sources of Data154
Satellite InSTePP Value-of-Production Accounts156
Part III Agricultural R156
157156
6 Research Funding and Performance158
6.1 Overall Spending on the Sciences158
International Developments159
Domestic R159
160159
6.2 Global Agricultural R159
164159
Private Agricultural R159
167159
6.3 U.S. Public and Private Agricultural Research168
U.S. Private Agricultural Research Spending168
U.S. Public Agricultural Research Spending170
6.4 Trends in U.S. Public Agricultural Research and Extension Spending172
Commodity Orientation175
Productivity Orientation177
Extension Trends180
Research Personnel181
6.5 Intensity of Investment182
Variation in Intensities Among States183
Commodity Congruence187
Spatial Patterns189
6.6 Sources and Forms of Funding192
Research192
Extension195
6.7 Conclusion196
7 The Federal Role207
7.1 Enhanced Incentives to Innovate208
Intellectual Property Rights209
Expanding Scope of Intellectual Property Rights210
Trends in Plant-Related Intellectual Property Rights211
7.2 Organized Agricultural Research and Extension213
The First 100 Years214
More-Recent Legislation215
7.3 Forms of Federal Funding218
Formula and Other Block-Funding Instruments219
Competitive Grants220
Earmarked Funds225
Trends in Funding Forms226
7.4 Conclusion230
APPENDIX III249
U.S. Public Agricultural Researchand Extension Series249
State Agricultural Experiment Stations (SAESs)249
Total Expenditures249
Minnesota and Vermont Corrections251
Scope of Included Research252
RPA (Research Problem Area) and Commodity Focus254
Intramural USDA Research254
Extension Expenditures255
Research Deflator256
Part IV Models of R256
257256
8 Research Lags and Spillovers258
8.1 R258
259258
8.2 Stylized Facts about R258
263258
8.3 Evidence on Research-Innovation-Adoption Lags267
Wheat267
Hybrid Corn270
Biotech Corn273
Uptake of Other Innovations by U.S. Agriculture275
8.4 Spatial Aspects of the R275
278275
Previous Work on Agricultural Technology Spillovers278
8.5 Conclusion281
Appendix 8-1 Models of Industrial R281
284281
R281
R281
284281
Spillovers in Models of Industrial R281
286281
9 Models of Research and Productivity289
9.1 Modeling Productivity and Knowledge Stocks289
9.2 Specification of R289
293289
Gamma Lag Distribution294
Trapezoidal Lag Distribution295
Influence of Lag Specification on Knowledge Stocks300
9.3 Spillover Coefficients and Knowledge Stocks302
A Measure of Spillover Potential Based on Output Mix303
Estimates of Spillover Coefficients304
Federal-State Spillover Coefficients—Spatial Patterns and Trends308
State-to-State