Are returns to research quality lower in agricultural economics than in economics?

We compare effects of research quality and quantity on the salary of academics in agricultural economics and economics departments of the same universities. Agricultural economists get a significantly lower payoff to research quality, whether measured by quality‐weighted journal articles (based on nine different weighting schemes) or by citations. Instead, salary depends on the quantity of journal articles, while article counts have no independent effect on economist salaries. These differences in the reward structure for research are not due to either the extension focus of agricultural economists or to disciplinary differences in publishing with students and instead may reflect institutional factors that govern incentives within universities. One‐third of academics in the agricultural economics departments studied here have doctoral training in economics; the very different disciplinary reward structures may cause frustration for these faculty due to the muted returns to research quality that agricultural economics departments seem to offer.     

Interdisciplinary Agricultural Research in Canada

The activities and accomplishments of agricultural economists conducting interdisciplinary research in association with other agricultural scientists in Canada are reviewed and evaluated. Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada instituted an interdisciplinary research program with the placement of agricultural economists at Research Centres in the early 1970s. University- and government-employed agricultural economists have produced a large number of important studies for the benefit of the agricultural industry in Canada. However, less than 3% of the articles published in this journal since its inception in 1952 report on interdisciplinary research. Interdisciplinary research in agriculture has been hampered by organizational weaknesses and inherent difficulties associated with conducting this type of research.     

THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE AGRICULTURAL ECONOMICS PROFESSION IN ENGLAND

An historical sketch of the professionalisation of agricultural economics since the mid-1920s placing special emphasis on the close links between government and universities, the pioneering role of the Ministry of Agriculture's economists during the inter-war years, and their changing post-war status and functions as compared with other economists in Whitehall. Other topics considered include the composition and functions of the Agricultural Economics Society, recent academic trends in agricultural economics, and the implications of the current crisis in economics for the future of the discipline.     

Communicating Economic Concepts and Research in a Challenging Environment

This address explores the communication challenges facing the economics profession and agri‐food and rural economists in particular against a background of reputational damage to the profession and an apparent loss of trust in experts. It argues that a common thread linking many of the challenges is the need for more effective models of communication so that our economic concepts, ideas and research findings can be more timely, better understood and, most importantly, have greater impact. Five important challenges are examined: loss of trust in experts; emotions and decision making; the role of the media; the roles of agri‐food and rural economists; and competition from other disciplines and interests. A good practice communications framework is then proposed embodying ten important communication principles: understanding the target audience; understanding the political context of decision makers; generating a robust evidence base; building reputation and credibility; need for cross disciplinary working; consulting with stakeholder groups; getting the timing right; producing high quality presentations; making use of social media; and being prepared for challenges. Four stereotypical categories of communication incorporating different standards of rigour and relevance are identified: Ivory tower; Gold Standard; Populist; and Quicksand. Responses by the Agricultural Economics Society and the European Association of Agricultural Economists to the need for more accessible communications via the development of the innovative outreach journal EuroChoices are outlined.     

Renaming Regional Journals: A Successful Strategy for Expanding from a Niche Market?

Changes in agriculture have led to faculty reductions and shifts in research funding sources for agricultural economics departments. Agricultural economics journals have been affected by these developments, since they must compete for authors and readers in a changed market. One strategy regional journals have used to address these changes has been renaming to names that suggest the journals publish a broader range of applied economics research. This article examined changes in the distribution of authorship of the Review of Agricultural Economics , the Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics , and the Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics before and after their renaming.     

USE OF SOCIOLOGY IN AGRICULTURAL ECONOMICS

Agricultural economists have been slow to approach other behavioural sciences. Nevertheless, sociology, concerned with social interaction among persons, social psychology focusing on behaviour as determined by personality and economics, dealing with the allocation of scarce resources to maximise welfare, offer complementary explanations of human behaviour. Sociology can provide a more informed basis for the simplifying assumptions the economist makes about social structure and human motivation and help to account for noneconomic variations in phenomena of common interest. The economist may benefit from the approach, concepts and empirical generalisations of sociology and may borrow variables, survey techniques and methods of analysis. Examples of studies in agricultural economics where sociology might contribute include problem farming areas, occupational mobility, regional or rural community development, agricultural extension and adoption of innovations, consumer behaviour and co-operation.     

20世纪80年代土地经济学的复苏、发展与繁荣

研究目的：挖掘丰富的历史文字资料和访谈记录,全面、细致地描述和总结20世纪80年代中国土地经济学复苏、发展与繁荣的过程与成就。研究方法：资料分析法。研究结果：中国土地经济学术研究在20世纪80年代初期复苏之后,于20世纪80年代中后期进入了繁荣期,主要表现在：各高校陆续开设土地经济学课程,一大批学者专门从事土地经济学研究,相关论文出现在各大期刊上,专门的土地经济学研究机构、地区性及全国性土地经济研究会陆续创设,一批土地经济学教材正式出版,专门的土地经济期刊开始刊行,并翻译、影印出版了国外土地经济学名著。研究结论：20世纪80年代土地经济学者的开拓和探索奠定了土地经济学教学与研究的坚实基础,新一代研究者应继承前辈的创新精神,在完善研究机构、振兴学术团体、打造学术期刊交流平台、编写高水平教材等方面多做努力,续写土地经济研究的新篇章。     

基于文献计量视角的国际农业经济研究综述

本文利用VOSviewer、AE、COOC等文献计量工具,基于4374篇来自于WoS网站八种农业经济领域知名期刊2011-2020年发表的学术论文(Article),分析了近十年来国际农业经济研究的热点问题及其演变、高被引论文的主要观点、国际间的合作关系以及国家/地区、机构、个人、期刊的学术影响.中国粮食安全是国际农业...     

Tracking Agricultural Economics Professionals

In 1998, a survey of the American Agricultural Economics Association was conducted by the Committee on Women in Agricultural Economics. The survey was the first in an ongoing tracking system, funded by the American Agricultural Economics Association Foundation, designed to track the progress of agricultural economics professionals over time, examine factors that influence their professional development, and investigate changes over time in the composition of the profession and issues influencing change. This study provides the background and objectives of the tracking system, the survey procedure, and basic demographics of the American Agricultural Economics Association and survey respondents.     

AGRICULTURAL ECONOMICS,INTERDEPENDENCE AND UNCERTAINTY*

Interdependence has always been central to economics but assumes pressing importance for agricultural economists as they deal with industrialising agricultures. Continued unresolvable uncertainties, when properly recognised, also add to the challenge of relevant work in agricultural economics. The related roles of interdependence and uncertainty are illustrated through examples from the progress of agricultural technology and enhancement of food security.     

Report of the Managing Editor

Overall, 2002 was a good year for the Journal. Importantly, submissions have recovered from their unusually low level recorded in 2001 and by the end of the year the quality of the printing and production systems had improved considerably. One further aspect of the Society's modernisation, the on‐line availability of the JAE, was established in July and initial indications on its usage are very encouraging, with over 1600 ‘hits’recorded in the first six months of operation. Average editorial response time has fallen to 4.6 months, only a little way short of our 4‐month target for submission turnaround. On the basis of current (2001) data collated by the Institute of Scientific Information, the JAE ranks 1^st, 2^nd, and 1^st in terms of its three citations criteria among the eight journals in the Agricultural Economics and Policy Category. In terms of impact factor, it is 60^th out of 165 economics journals.     

THE SEARCH FOR THE COST OF PRODUCTION, 1914-30

The Agriculture Act 1920, provided for British fanners from the the the autumn of 1921 guaranteed minimum prices for wheat and oats which were to be adjusted year by year in accordance with changes in ‘the cost of production’ from those recorded for the base year 1919. In preparation for this task, the agricultural departments of the United Kingdom established an Agricultural Costings Committee under a director and deputy director at Whitehall, and with 26 costings officers among the farmers in the counties. And here begins the official research into agricultural economics in this country, as distinct from the academic. For although the Agriculture Act 1920 was repealed in 1921 just before it came into force and the Costings Committee was disbanded at the same time, the collection and analysis of farming costs was soon revived by the institution of the advisory economics service. The present paper describes the events which led up to the Agricultural Costings Committee and the continuing search for ‘the cost of production’ by the agricultural economists in the early days of the advisory service.     

AN APPROACH TO UNIVERSITY TEACHING IN AGRICULTURAL ECONOMICS

In our complex industrialised society there can no longer be a clear cut distinction between education and the training for a profession. Pressure from society for highly specialised knowledge and from students for satisfaction of vocational needs has resulted in the greater development of applied subjects. The aim of teaching in Agricultural Economics is to present a variety of subject matter within the framework of cohesive degree structures consistent with an academic discipline, while as far as possible fitting a student for a professional career in the field of Agricultural Economics. In the ever widening range of professional activity a distinction which has relevance to teaching can be made between the practising agricultural economist and the academic agricultural economist. For the former some professional training has to be incorporated in the first degree scheme. The need in industry and government is for economists who are prepared to make direct economic appraisals and the practising economist will therefore be involved in problem solving in a sphere where non-economic consideration have also to be weighed. He can best be fitted for his environment if he is aware of the interaction between economics and other relevant disciplines.     

农业产业集聚对农业绿色全要素生产率的影响——基于空间溢出效应视角

目的 农业产业集聚是农业绿色发展的重要影响因素之一,剖析农业产业集聚对农业绿色全要素生产率的影响,有助于实现农业绿色化和现代化发展。方法 文章基于1998—2018年中国省域农业发展数据,引入空间因素,通过构建空间杜宾模型分析农业产业集聚对农业绿色全要素生产率的影响及其空间溢出效应。结果 （1）在样本考察期内,中国农业产业集聚与农业绿色全要素生产率均存在明显的空间相关性;（2）农业产业集聚对农业绿色全要素生产率具有显著的负向影响,且该影响具有明显的空间溢出效应,在一定程度上制约了周边区域农业绿色全要素生产率的提升;（3）财政支农、工业化和自然灾害对农业绿色全要素生产率具有显著的负向影响,城市化、对外开放对农业绿色全要素生产率具有显著的正向影响。结论 应把握省域农业空间关联规律,推进区域农业绿色、协调发展,优化资源配置,科学布局农业产业,并从财政支持、城镇化、工业化、自然灾害和农业开放水平等方面推进农业绿色全要素生产率的提升。     

Smallholder cooperatives and agricultural performance in Rwanda: do organizational differences matter?

Agricultural policies in Rwanda focus on agricultural intensification and increased market orientation of the smallholder farm sector. Cooperatives are seen as key vehicles in this, but little is known about their effectiveness to achieve these goals. In this article, we analyze the impact of cooperative membership on the agricultural performance of rural households in Rwanda. We use cross‐sectional survey data, collected in 2012, to analyze the impact of cooperative membership on different agricultural performance indicators, including indicators on agricultural intensification, market orientation, farm revenue, and income. We use several econometric techniques to deal with potential selection bias in estimating the impact of cooperative membership, including a proxy variable method based on a willingness to pay measure and propensity score matching methods. We find that cooperative membership in general has a positive impact on farm performance but these effects are driven by specific types of cooperatives.     

SOME DEVELOPMENT OPTIONS FOR THE COMMON AGRICULTURAL POLICY

This paper begins with a summary of the current state of Community financing of the Common Agricultural Policy. A brief survey of the currently discussed options for change leads to the conclusion that feasible developments will involve extension of the use of existing instruments rather than wholesale reform. If agreement on such extensions cannot be reached, there is likely to be unplanned nationalisation of agricultural support expenditures. The economic impacts of three measures to cope with surplus production using existing policy instruments-price reductions, co-responsibility levies and supplementary levies-are analysed, as is a possible budgetary solution to the surplus problem-surplus contributions. The paper concludes with some remarks about the desirability of these various development options and the role of economists in the debate about CAP reform.     

Elegy,ode or panegyric? Practising agricultural economics in Australia, 1975–99

Changes are investigated in the Australian agricultural economics profession, 1975–99, using a conventional microeconomics framework of supply and demand for agricultural economists. Aggregate exogenous factors such as changes in the agricultural and tertiary education sectors, and changes in beliefs about the proper role of government, have changed both supply and demand conditions for agricultural economists. The profession has responded by shifting its focus away from narrowly agricultural policy, especially marketing policy, towards areas of market failure such as environmental and natural resource issues.     

Towards Agricultural Policy 3.0 – an agenda for agricultural research

This article reviews the development from market‐based support measures (‘Agricultural Policy 1.0’) towards direct and decoupled payments (‘Agricultural Policy 2.0’) which are increasingly justified by environmentally friendly practices (‘Agricultural Policy 2.1’) to which payments are bound. It describes frequent problems connected with today's agri‐environmental programmes, particularly non‐compliance and a too indirect link between practices paid for and environmental effects. Other programmes have started to pay farmers more directly for environmental outputs on their fields, such as the number of valuable plants on their grassland. Transaction costs for the administration and control of these programmes have been shown to remain at an acceptable level, so that such output‐related policies may be effective and promising options. It is suggested to direct the work of agricultural researchers, including economists, into looking for a stronger link between environmental outputs and public support, something that could be termed Agricultural Policy 3.0. This could lend some more visibility, relevance and attractiveness to our discipline .     

Judging agricultural policies: a survey

This survey provides a structured picture of 40 years of literature which uses welfare economic tools to judge agricultural policy. Challenges and developments of normative agricultural policy analysis are discussed in an easily accessible graphical framework. It is shown how the literature has gone from examining a very small discrete set of simple policies to a much broader (often continuous) set of policies that combine policy instruments simultaneously. The importance of the Pareto criterion, used to explore the limits of how government can affect welfare, is revealed. Moreover, given the importance of the objective of income redistribution in agricultural policy, agricultural economists have often departed from the purely efficiency‐oriented tradition in economics. It is shown that they have tried to incorporate equity considerations by either adding these criteria as constraints to the social welfare function, or directly incorporating these criteria in the functional form of the social welfare function.     

Gender Based Differences of Performance and Pay Among Agricultural Economics Faculty

In 1998, the Committee on Women in Agricultural Economics (CWAE) began a tracking project to more closely examine and report on issues and trends in the agricultural economics profession. This study presents results on performance and pay among academics, focusing on differences across genders. Experience and refereed journal articles appear to have the greatest affect on salary differences. Discussion on several academic issues of debate, including nine- versus eleven-month appointments and workload expectations, is also presented.