Quantifying the Impact of Scientific Research on Agriculture

With the growing importance of science and innovation for farming, the scope for summary monetary estimates of the impact of agricultural research on productivity suggests internal rates of return of between 7 and 15 per cent, and time lags in maximum impact of around nine years. However, the extent to which the transmission process can be regarded as a ‘black box’ for econometric purposes is considered increasingly inappropriate, since the intermediate steps between research and the impacts of resulting technology adoption are increasingly complex and involve growing numbers of actors, actions and a wider set of policy objectives. Significant difficulties are encountered in quantifying research impacts, including gaps in data for dependent and explanatory variables. New features of the agricultural sector also need to be accounted for, which relate to the role of knowledge engineering, globalisation and the establishment of new impact pathways which are affecting the speed of transmission of innovations. Public support for agricultural research funding is generally justified but returns are not sufficiently high, thus requiring careful reflection on priorities for research investment. Combined use of qualitative and quantitative evaluation approaches can be complementary and more effective than relying on either alone.     

Tracing the Pathways from Research to Innovation: Evidence from Case Studies

The complex process through which agricultural research stimulates innovation and achieves policy goals has commonly been treated as a ‘black box’ in the scientific literature. Statistical correlations between measured expenditure and impacts, where satisfactorily established, have mostly led to details of the research and innovation system being ignored. However, identifying and exploring causal chains of impact propagation can strengthen agricultural innovation. IMPRESA investigated impact mechanisms for research‐based innovations in six case studies using a Participatory Impact Pathway Assessment approach. Several suggestions result for improving performance and public support for agricultural research. Planning for impact is needed at the design phase of research so that expected advances in technology and their consequences can be explored. At that stage and throughout the research process, soft social skills are required to promote uptake. Greater impact can be achieved through the close involvement of key public and private sector stakeholders, using stakeholder mapping as a supporting tool. There is a strong argument for the close involvement of relevant social scientists and professional facilitators from the design phase of research through to its ultimate impacts. Funding frameworks and the specification of calls for tenders would function more effectively by giving more flexibility for stakeholder engagement.     

Pathways for impact: scientists' different perspectives on agricultural innovation

This paper takes the viewpoint of a social scientist and looks at agricultural scientists' pathways for science impact. Awareness of these pathways is increasingly becoming part and parcel of the professionalism of the agricultural scientist, now that the pressure is on to mobilize smallholders and their productive resources for (global) food security and for reducing persistent rural poverty. Significant new thinking about pathways is emerging and it is useful to present some of this, even if it is not cut-and-dried. This new thinking focuses on innovation, not as the end-of-pipe outcome of development and transfer (or ‘delivery’) of results of research to ‘ultimate users’, but as a process of technical and institutional change at farm and higher system levels that impacts on productivity, sustainability and poverty reduction.

This paper will review technology supply push; farmer-driven innovation; market-propelled or induced innovation based on the agricultural treadmill; participatory technology development; and innovation systems. The pathways reviewed all have their merits; the paper will assess them from the perspective of improving smallholder productivity and livelihoods.

This paper concludes that many agricultural scientists have not developed their thinking about how the fruits of their work can help make the world a better place. This is a flaw in their professionalism. Curriculum development, training, promotion criteria, standards used in refereeing journal articles and research funding could benefit from taking on board understanding of pathways of science-for-impact.     

Impact of agricultural innovation adoption: a meta‐analysis

The impacts of adopting agricultural innovation and technology are widely examined. This paper synthesises 154 studies, which yielded a total of 600 estimates of the impact of adopting agricultural innovation and technology on production, social and economic outcomes. Using meta‐regression analysis, the empirical results show that the reported impact of adopting agricultural innovation and technology rises significantly over time, notwithstanding a significant publication bias. Whether studies find significant impacts of adopting agricultural innovation and technology depends on the use of experimental research designs, parametric method, endogenous switching regression and region. Our results show a large bias in the literature towards agricultural innovations and technologies that focus on high‐yielding varieties and thus, neglect other forms of complementary innovations and technologies.     

近年来《中国土地科学》期刊影响力分析及提升路径

研究目的：分析《中国土地科学》期刊近年来的影响力现状，提出未来提升期刊影响力的路径。研究方法：文献分析法。研究结果：近年来，《中国土地科学》期刊影响力逐年提升，影响因子、总被引频次、国际影响力指数、即年指标等整体呈上升趋势，在土地科学领域内保持了较高的办刊水准；《中国土地科学》高影响力论文在选题上普遍聚焦国家战略和土地科学学科发展需求，高影响力作者在本刊发布的成果比重较小，高影响力研究机构发表的成果要数量与质量协同，国家级基金项目资助的论文影响力较大。研究结论：跟踪高影响力研究团队及重大项目，打造高端学术交流平台，加速期刊与新媒体融合，探索期刊英文出版模式，适时扩大载文量，是进一步提升《中国土地科学》影响力的关键路径。     

农业技术进步、空间效应与城乡收入差距基于省级面板数据的分析

目的 通过构建空间计量模型，实证检验2007—2018年我国农业技术进步对城乡收入差距的直接影响和空间溢出效应。方法 文章基于我国31个省（区、市，不含港澳台）的面板数据，利用空间杜宾模型，并设置邻接矩阵、地理距离矩阵和经济距离矩阵，分析农业技术进步对城乡收入差距的影响，并进一步将农业技术进步分解为农业前沿技术进步和农业技术效率。结果 （1）中国省域城乡收入差距具有显著的空间集聚特征，呈现出“高—高”和“低—低”的空间分布特征。（2）农业技术进步不仅有利于缩小当地城乡收入差距，还可以通过空间溢出效应促进邻近地区城乡收入差距的缩小。（3）农业前沿技术进步对当地城乡收入差距的缩小具有显著的促进作用，但对邻近地区的溢出效应不明显；农业技术效率则具有明显的空间溢出效应。结论 农业技术进步有助于缩小城乡收入差距。要继续加大农业科技投入，进行农业科技创新，提升农业技术效率，同时加强省际间的交流与合作，促使区域间农业技术的创新、转化与扩散。     

European Agricultural Science Funding: Examining Trends and Prospects

Proper evaluation of the impact of agricultural research requires data on how much has been spent to achieve its desired effects on productivity, efficiency and environmental quality. However, official statistics on aggregate volumes of research expenditure, at both European and national levels, are intermittently available and most data collected for private research are not fully compatible with data for public research. This study in 20 European countries in 2014 defines the different concepts at international level, and assesses coverage across countries, using secondary data and key informant interviews. Coverage is unequal by country and type of measure, the lowest coverage being for agriculture as a socioeconomic objective. We depict recent trends in public agricultural research, which differ by country. We then formulate three policy options and recommendations for their implementation to improve the monitoring of agricultural research investment in Europe: 1) make compulsory in the EU statistical system the collection of statistics on agricultural research expenditure using the same metrics for all sectors of performance; 2) develop a specific survey in the Commission to obtain data directly from research organisations; 3) prepare annual reviews of agricultural research expenditures at Member State level, including both quantitative and qualitative information on agricultural research activities.     

Impact of land tenure on land use in low-income countries

The role of land tenure in agricultural development has been a subject of intensive research, particularly within the context of land and agrarian reform. The complexity of the world's major land tenure systems is well recognized and no attempt is made here to go beyond an overview as this paper limits itself to the impact of land tenure on land use in low income situations. Present land use is determined by a host of factors, of a physical/biological and socioeconomic nature. In applying land evaluation, the question it is necessary to ask is to what extent, when and where land tenure conditions act as a considerable constraining factor impeding a more optimal use of land resources. Even in what used to be low-population density areas (such as Sub-Saharan Africa) it appears that the frontier phase is becoming exhausted and the intensification of agriculture proceeds; it becomes imperative to examine land tenure in relation to land use implications. It is shown that so far a multi-disciplinary approach has often been lacking in treating land tenure and related issues.     

The use of ex-ante modelling tools in European Impact Assessment: What role does land use play?

Impact Assessment was introduced by the European Commission in 2002 in order to make policy development more transparent and improve the ‘quality’ of European policies. Cross-sectoral consultation, broad participation and the quantitative assessment of the impacts of policies are significant elements of this process. This article specifically addresses the role of tools modelling the impact of policies on land use in Impact Assessment. The choice of a specific modelling tool is conceptualised as an action situation interlinked with other action arenas. The article aims to uncover the institutions structuring the action situation. The outcome of the empirical work suggests that two types of Impact Assessments can be distinguished. Impact Assessments either substantively contribute to the specific policy that the Commission proposes or they legitimise policy choices ex post that have already been adopted. The legislative procedure that applies to a specific policy sector, the policy making culture in the DG and the stakes that are at issue seem to influence whether Impact Assessments contribute to policy development, or legitimise it. Furthermore, the article describes the situation in which desk officers choose a modelling tool throughout Impact Assessment. To advance their careers desk officers aim to produce policy proposals which respond to the issues raised by the actors involved in Impact Assessment and specifically in policy development and, later on, adoption. Therefore, desk officers’ preferences are shaped by the community that is involved in policy development and Impact Assessment. The article describes what role modelling tools play in European Impact Assessment procedures and it names the heuristic of criteria which desk officers use to choose a modelling tool. Besides several technical and data problems of modelling land use impact, it seems to be unlikely that land use will become a significant dimension of Impact Assessment and modelling as it is confronted with an unfavourable institutional environment at the European level.     

The Impact of Pillar II Funding: Validation from a Modelling and Evaluation Perspective

We extend the Common Agricultural Policy Regionalised Impact Modelling System (CAPRI) with a regional computational general equilibrium (CGE) model to estimate the effects of the Pillar II of the Common Agricultural Policy. Our aim is to assess the modeling approach by comparing the scenario results with observations from the evaluation reports for rural development, supplemented with expert interviews and findings from the literature. For this purpose, an ex‐post scenario is developed for Germany that models the effect of the Pillar II measures in 2006. We observe a moderate impact, namely, an increase in agricultural income (5%) and agricultural land use (0.15%), particularly grassland, and a substitution of arable land with grassland. This effect leads to a total increase in agricultural production, particularly of beef, and to an increase in total greenhouse gas emissions and total nitrogen surplus for Germany. Greenhouse gas emissions and nutrient surpluses per ha, however, are reduced. We observe that farm investment programmes displace private investment. The evaluation reports confirm the moderate impact and our major results, as does the comparison with other literature. However, the conclusions about agri‐environment measures and their impact on income differ. The most important difference between our results and the evaluation reports and majority of the present literature is that we also quantify the joint effect between the whole economy and policy measures, with some contradictory effects.     

Measuring the impacts of agricultural research on poverty reduction

Policymakers are increasingly calling upon agricultural research managers to consider poverty reduction objectives when making resource allocations. The authors present a simple method to measure the impact of agricultural research on the poor. This method has the advantage that it presents the results in a manner consistent with commonly used measures of poverty. This consistency and focus should facilitate and enhance dialogue between policymakers and research managers when deciding on resource allocations and assessing impacts on poverty reduction. An illustrative application is presented using data from Malawi.     

Ex post impacts of improved maize varieties on poverty in rural Ethiopia

Public agricultural research has been conducted in Africa for decades. While many studies have examined its aggregate impacts, few have investigated how it affects the poor. This paper helps fill this gap by applying a new procedure to explore the ex post impacts of improved maize varieties on poverty in rural Ethiopia. Plot‐level yield and cost changes due to adoption are first estimated using instrumental variable and marginal treatment effect techniques where possible heterogeneity is carefully accounted for. A backward derivation procedure is then developed to link treatment effect estimates with an economic surplus model to identify the counterfactual household income that would have existed without improved maize varieties. Poverty impacts are finally estimated by exploiting the differences between observed and counterfactual income distributions. Improved maize varieties have led to a 0.8–1.3 percentage drop of poverty headcount ratio and relative reductions of poverty depth and severity. However, poor producers benefit the least from adoption due to the smallness of their land holdings.     

全产业链视角下徐州国家农业科技园产业融合研究

基于全产业链的视角,研究分析徐州国家农业科技园产业融合现存的问题。针对该园区缺少组织链、供给链不完善、销售链纵深不足的问题,提出如何从深挖农民增收潜力和增加价值链链条环扣方面发展价值链、如何塑造并完善组织链、如何利用互联网完善信息链以及如何延长和拓宽销售链的发展建议。即从价值链、组织链、信息链、销售链四个链条入手,促进徐州国家农业科技园产业融合发展,得出要让产业链条形成圈式结构,使生产要素在链条上流动增长、互相返哺的结论。     

Efficiency effects of agricultural economics research in the United States

Allocations of research funds across programs are often made for efficiency reasons. Social science research is shown to have small, lagged but significant effects on U.S. agricultural efficiency when public agricultural R&D and extension are simultaneously taken into account. Farm management and marketing research variables are used to explain variations in estimates of allocative and technical efficiency using a Bayesian approach that incorporates stylized facts concerning lagged research impacts in a way that is less restrictive than popular polynomial distributed lags. Results are reported in terms of means and standard deviations of estimated probability distributions of parameters and long‐run total multipliers. Extension is estimated to have a greater impact on both allocative and technical efficiency than either R&D or social science research.     

Do Formula or Competitive Grant Funds Have Greater Impacts on State Agricultural Productivity?

This article examines the impact of public agricultural research and extension on agricultural total factor productivity at the state level. The objective is to establish whether federal formula or competitive grant funding of agricultural research has a greater impact on state agricultural productivity. A pooled cross-section time-series model of agricultural productivity is fitted to annual data for forty-eight contiguous states over 1970–1999. Our results show that public agricultural research and agricultural extension have statistically significant positive impacts on state agricultural productivity. In addition, Hatch formula funding has a larger impact on agricultural productivity than federal competitive grant funding, and a reallocation of Hatch formula funds to competitive grant funding would lower agricultural productivity. This seems unlikely to be a socially optimal policy. Furthermore, from a cost–benefit perspective, our study shows that the social marginal annualized real rate of return to public resources invested in agricultural research is 49–62%, and to public agricultural extension, the rate is even larger.     

国外农产品气候品质评价研究进展

目的 文章阐述了围绕气候条件开展的国外农产品品质评价研究,明确国外农产品气候品质评价研究的现状,便于把握今后国内农产品气候品质评价的研究方向。方法 基于国外已有研究成果,从农产品气候品质评价相关概念出发,对农产品气候品质的影响因素、评价方法、指标构建、应用等方面进行了系统归纳阐述。结果 国外农产品气候品质影响因素主要分为天气气候、极端气候事件、土壤、水文、生物和人为等,评价方法主要有数理统计法、模型模拟法以及3S技术监测法,评价指标可分为模型模拟指标、定量指标以及分级指标。近年来国外农产品气候品质评价在特色农产品发展、作物适宜种植区划分、气候变化适应策略制定、农作物品种引进等领域应用广泛。结论 构建基于多环境因素的农产品气候品质评价指标、探索前沿科学技术在气候品质评价中应用的新方法、开展未来气候变化对农业气候资源动态评估和农产品气候品质评价研究、拓展特色农产品的气候品质评价研究等是今后国内研究的重点方向。     

基于三阶段SBM模型的中国农业生态效率研究

[目的]剔除外生环境影响和随机干扰对农业生态效率的影响,更精准测度中国各地农业生态效率,为中国绿色农业发展提供有效建议。[方法]文章基于考虑非期望产出的SBM模型结合三阶段DEA建模法构建考虑非期望产出的三阶段SBM模型,利用2008—2017年中国31省(市、自治区)面板数据,在剔除外生环境影响和随机干扰的基础上对中国各地农业生态效率进行了测度。[结果]外生环境影响和随机干扰对农业生态效率测度有着明显影响,在外生环境影响和随机干扰下2008—2017年中国31省市农业生态效率均值皆有明显下降,因此使用三阶段SBM模型是必要的;宏观经济环境改善会增加农业生态效率冗余,政策支持力度的加大和科技发展能减少农业生态效率冗余;整体来看,中国农业生态效率不断改善,第三阶段中国31省市农业生态效率均值从2008年的0.37增长到2017年的0.59,但未达到效率前沿,仍具有改进空间,其中,农业生态效率领先省(市、自治区)与落后省(市、自治区)之间差距较大,第三阶段农业生态效率均值最高的广东省比最低的西藏自治区高出0.85。[结论]为了提高农业生态效率促进绿色农业发展一方面需要营造良好外部环境,重视科技创新作用;另一方面要多角度推动农业环境改善,促进地区交流合作。     

内蒙古玉米干旱风险区划方法研究

针对目前内蒙古地区农业保险业的现实需求,特别是农业可持续发展、农业防灾减灾等的重大科技需求,急需开展农业气象灾害影响评估技术服务,实现对农业气象灾害风险的定量分析和动态评估。为了填补内蒙古干旱风险区划研究的空白,文章针对内蒙古玉米的作物特性进行研究,利用119个气象站点1960~2013年的温度、降水、日照、相对湿度、风速等观测资料,综合考虑了致灾因子和承载体的地域特性,建立了内蒙古玉米气候区划、气象干旱、农业干旱、气候生产潜力、气候适宜性5个方面的干旱风险评估指标。利用GIS的空间分析功能,对各指标进行重分类和叠置分析,确定内蒙古玉米干旱风险动态评估分级指标体系,对内蒙古2011~2013年玉米干旱进行了风险评估模拟。评估结果与内蒙古2011~2013年玉米实际年景十分相符,证明了该风险区划方法在内蒙古地区的可行性,可以为有关部门控制农业气象灾害的发生、防御或减轻灾害对农业生产的危害、制定救灾措施、农业灾害保险政策、进行风险转移提供科学依据,进而最大限度地减轻灾害造成的不利影响。     

Invasive species: The categorization of wildlife in science,policy, and wildlife management

Species categories commonly used in nature conservation, such as protected, endangered, reintroduced, or invasive, are open to various interpretations that can result in diverging and sometimes serious consequences. This is vividly apparent with respect to invasiveness because the categorization of species and individual animals as invasive impacts on how they are treated in practice. This article demonstrates how different constructions of invasiveness in science, policy, and wildlife management can be traced back to different assessments of the origin, behavior, and impact of the invasives. Specifically, the focus is on the different conceptions of space and the role of data in the categorization of invasives. We find that, in science and policy, invasiveness is constructed mainly in terms of the origin and impact of invasives but that these domains differ in how they treat space in their assessment of origin: whereas science uses ecological spaces, such as biogeographical regions, to assess whether a species belongs to, or is invasive in, a certain area, policy uses policy spaces such as countries or states to do so. In assessing the impact of invasives, science argues about including it in its definition, whereas policy requires detailed data about ecological, societal, and economic damage in order to take action. In wildlife management, the focus in the construction of invasiveness shifts from origin and impact to behavior of invasives. This requires detailed data about where the invasives are, where they are going, and what they are doing. By showing the dynamic and context-specific nature of the construction of invasiveness, the article contributes to ongoing research about classifications of nature, their difficulties and ambiguities, and their implementation and consequences in practice.     

The assessment of agritourism policy based on SEA combination with HIA

The decline in agricultural and other forms of rural employment in many countries has created a need for a diversified range of rural businesses. In most cases, agritourism has become an important element of the diverse activities in rural areas of Taiwan. However, there are a number of significant impacts from tourism activities that can be influenced by agritourism policy.Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA) is a procedural tool to assess policies and can aid the development of more sustainable policy formulation. However, SEA aims to assess environmental impacts; the health issues are often overlooked. Hence, a Delphi-Indicator approach to SEA is proposed here to integrate Health Impact Assessment (HIA). This new approach is based on the impact indicator system, and then the Delphi method is employed to collect experts’ opinions. After the evaluation system was established, the current agritourism policy and another alternative policy are assessed to examine this new method.Finally, various types of impacts from current agritourism policy in Taiwan are identified, and the significant impacts are as follows: resources usage (water, electricity, petroleum), pollution generation (waste, noise), and other landscape problems (mudflows and landslide, harmony of the rural landscape). In addition, several benefits are found from the alternative policy (agro-ecotourism) such as the amount of pesticides used per unit area, and environmental quality of local community since agro-ecotourism development is based on organic agriculture and combination with ecotourism to provide acceptable recreation opportunity without destroying natural rural environment. In summary, the impacts are less significant from agro-ecotourism than those from current agritourism policy, and these positive changes are not only in the environmental sector, but also within the economic, social, and health issues.