Supporting agricultural research policy and priority decisions: an economic-ecologic systems approach

  • S. Wood
  • P. G. Pardey
Part of the Systems Approaches for Sustainable Agricultural Development book series (PBTS)


This paper describes a quantitative, systems approach to agricultural research evaluation and priority setting. The approach is designed to support (ex ante) resource allocation decisions at the research-program level. To achieve this support, it links technical research parameters derived on an agroecological basis to a multi-market economic model to estimate the social benefits of research-induced technological change. The direct effects of research may be exhibited in the form of yield increases, cost reductions, and natural-resource impacts.

The economic-ecologic approach can be extended to allow explicit modelling of research effects at the production level. This will enhance our ability to deal with research effects that exhibit a large degree of spatial variability. It will also be possible to make more effective use of conventional biophysical models (e.g., crop growth, land evaluation, and soil-erosion models) to estimate the likely consequences of research.

Key words

agroecological zones economic GIS maintenance research priority setting production system research efficiency systems approach 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Adusei E O and Norton G W (1990) The Magnitude ofAgricultural Maintenance Research in the United States. Journal of ProductionAgriculture. Vol. 3, No. 1. (January/March): 1–6.Google Scholar
  2. Alston J M and Pardey P G (1993) Market Distortionsand Technological Progress in Agriculture. Technological Forecasting and SocialChange Vol. 43, No. 3/4 (May/June):301–19.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Alston J M, Norton G W, Pardey P G (1994) ScienceUnder Scarcity: Principles and Practice for Research Evaluation andPriority Setting. Cornell University Press, Ithaca, USA. (forthcoming).Google Scholar
  4. Anderson J R, Thamapapillai J (1990) SoilConservation in Developing Countries: Project and Policy Intervention.Policy in Research Series No. 8. World Bank, Washington DC, USA.Google Scholar
  5. Van den Berg M (1992) SWEAP, a computer program forwater erosion assessment applied to SOTER. SOTER Report No. 7. ISSS-UNEP-ISRIC, Wageningen,TheNetherlands.Google Scholar
  6. CIMMYT Economics Program (1993) The Adoption ofAgricultural Technology: A Guide for Survey Design. D.F, CIMMYT, MexicoGoogle Scholar
  7. Davis J S, Oram P A, Ryan J G (1987) Assessment ofAgricultural Research Priorities: An International Perspective.ACIAR Monograph No 4. ACIAR, Canberra, Australia.Google Scholar
  8. Davis J S (1991) Spillover Effects of AgriculturalResearch: Importance for Research Policy and Incorporation in Research EvaluationModels. ACIAR/ISNAR Project Paper No. 32 (February), ACIAR and ISNAR,Canberra, Australia, and the Hague, The Netherlands.Google Scholar
  9. Edwards G W, Freebairn J W (1981) Measuring aCountry’s Gains From Research: Theory and Application to Rural Researchin Australia. A Report to the Commonwealth Council for Rural Research and Extension. Aust.Govt. Publ. Service, Canberra, Australia.Google Scholar
  10. Edwards G W, Freebairn T W (1984) The Gains fromResearch into Tradeable Commoditiess. American Journal of Agricultural EconomicsVol. 66, No. 1 (February):41–49.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Van Engelen V W P, Wen Ting-Tiang (1993) Global andNatural Soil and Terrain Digital Databases (SOTER) Procedures Manual. FAO, ISRIC, ISSS,UNEP, Wageningen,TheNetherlands.Google Scholar
  12. FAO (1989) Assessment of Population SupportingCapacity for Development Planning in Kenya: Soil Erosion and Productivity. WorkingPaper No 4. Final Draft. Land and Water Division, FAO, Rome.Google Scholar
  13. Griliches Z (1958) Research Costs and Social Returns: Hybrid Corn andRelated Innovations. Journal of Political Economy Vol. 66:419–431.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Maredia M K (1993) TheEconomics of the International Transfer of Wheat Varieties. PhD Dissertation, Michigan StateUniversity, East Lansing, USA.Google Scholar
  15. McGrath W and Arens P (1989) The Costs of SoilErosion on Java: A Natural Resource Accounting Approach.Environment Department Working Paper No. 18, World Bank, Washington, D.C.Google Scholar
  16. McConnell K E (1983) An Economic Model of SoilConservation. American Journal of Agricultural Economics. (February):83–89.Google Scholar
  17. Pardey P G and Wood S R (1994) Targeting Research byAgricultural Environments. Chapter 31 in Anderson J R (ed) AgriculturalTechnology Policy Issues for the International Community. CAB International,Wallingford, UK. (in press).Google Scholar
  18. Schultz T W (1956) Reflections on Agricultural Production Output and Supply.Journal of Farm Economics,Vol. 38, No. 3:748–762.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Stocking M (1984) Erosion and Soil Productivity: A Review. Consultants WorkingPaper No. 1. SoilConservationProgramme, Land and Water Division, FAO, Rome, Italy.Google Scholar
  20. Swanson E R (1979) EconomicEvaluation of Soil Erosion: Productivity Losses and Off-Site Damages. Dep. Agr. Econ. Staff Pap. No. 79 E-77, March, University of Illinois,USA.Google Scholar
  21. Wischmeier W H, Smith D D (1978) Predicting RainfallErosion Losses-A Guide to Conservation Planning. USDAAgricultural Handbook No. 537. USDA, Washington DC, USA.Google Scholar
  22. Wood S R, Pardey P G (1993)Agroecological Dimensions of Evaluating and Prioritizing Research from a Regional Perspective: Latin America and the Caribbean. ISNAR Discussion Paper No. 93–15.ISNAR,The Hague, The Netherlands.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 1994

Authors and Affiliations

  • S. Wood
    • 1
  • P. G. Pardey
    • 1
  1. 1.International Service for National Agricultural Research (ISNAR)The HagueThe Netherlands

Personalised recommendations