Investing in Research and Education versus Commodity Programs: Implications for Agricultural Productivity

The long-term impact of research, education, and various government support programs on U.S. agricultural productivity was analyzed using an error correction model. Results indicate that the proposed reduction in commodity program expenditures (e.g. 1996 Farm Bill) is unlikely to reduce agricultural productivity. Results suggest that shifting public funds from commodity programs to education and research would raise U.S. agricultural productivity. Our estimates of long-term rates of return to public research are lower than those from most previous, perhaps due to our improved model specification, but are high enough to justify continued public investments to raise productivity.     

Agricultural trade negotiations as a strategic game

This study views multilateral trade negotiations as a strategic game among nations or regions, including taxpayer, consumer, and producer components. Payoffs are calculated from an intermediate-run international trade model initialized with 1989 data. For the public at large, the Nash equilibrium and socially optimal outcome is liberalization of trade – unilateral or multilateral. Maintenance of the status quo of market distortions costing the world billions of dollars each year is rational only if producer payoffs are sovereign so that strategies optimal for producers are considered optimal for nations. Remedial policies are discussed, including opportunities for economic education, political system reform, and less incentives for producers to scuttle multilateral trade negotiations.