NOTICE: Hard copies of the Australian New Crops Newsletter are available from the publisher, Dr Rob Fletcher. Details of availability are included in the
Advice on Publications Available.The search for the most appropriate methods to conduct economic analysis of new crops worthy of research and development has led Greg Ferguson, a PhD scholar with the new crops program, into the area of the economic evaluation of research itself. He reviews a recent publication: Alston, J.M., Norton, G.W. and Pardey, P.G. (1995) "Science under Scarcity Principles and Practice for Agricultural Research Evaluation and Priority Setting." Cornell University Press, Ithaca and London.
Whatever the situation, Grandfather always knew the appropriate homily - a stitch in time - crying over spilt milk - a penny wise. There was one piece of wisdom which seems to apply particularly well to the economics profession. "If the only tool you have in the toolbox is a hammer - every problem looks like a nail." There is a limited tool kit that accompanies economists and as they are now tackling ever-wider problems of public choice, there seem to be nails everywhere.
Included in the ever-increasing range of economists' responsibilities is the task of setting research priorities. Responding to the world-wide challenge that agricultural research systems are being asked to do more with less, three American economists have recently published a 600-page tome under the title "Science under Scarcity - Principles and practice for Agricultural Research Evaluation and Priority Setting." This book is a stock-take of the economist's tool box as it applies to evaluating research priorities in agriculture. The evidence as to why economists hammer away at research priority problems is now on public display.
To solve the problem of which research project should be given a high priority, Alston, Norton and Pardey propose a measure of the increased producer and consumer welfare that results from the projects. Funding should be given to projects according to their impact on welfare. No welfare impact - no funds. Measuring welfare is no easy task. A whole truckload of assumptions is necessary before welfare can be weighted and even then it is impossible to compare the welfare of one group of people with the welfare of another group.
Where crop research is designed to increase the yield of a crop which has well documented prices and market characteristics, the evaluation methods proposed by the authors may be appropriate. Where the target of research is a crop where little is known about market prices, the whole methodology seems unsafe. The lack of market information necessarily limits the applicability of these methods to the process of prioritisation of new crops research.
Some research projects don't increase yields or the quantity of the targeted crop produced. Research to improve the quality of the product, research to stabilise yields, or research to improve the diversity of opportunities available to farmers are seen by economists as nails to be hammered with the same tool as is used to measure the impact of yield increases.
Research projects with multiple objectives are acknowledged as especially difficult prioritisation problems. If the objectives of the research agency include improved sustainability of agriculture and other objectives to redistribute wealth from rich city consumers to poor country folk, then the methodology proposed to prioritise research alternatives suffers serious inadequacies. How to evaluate expected outcomes against more than one criterion is a problem that plagues most scientific endeavours. The approach offered by these authors is to convert all the outcomes to monetary terms, thus rendering everything as a nail. Such an approach will hardly find universal appeal.
Sustainability is a fashionable objective of many agricultural research agencies. Sustainability is not only difficult to define, it is also difficult to measure in today's, tomorrow's or the next generation's dollars. Despite the popularity of sustainability as a research objective, it is largely ignored by Alston, Norton and Pardey; a specific tool to measure impacts on sustainability isn't in the economists' toolbox.
Also missing from the economists' toolbox is a useable tool to handle uncertainty. Research is plagued by uncertainty. The possibility of a certain research program failing to meet its intended objectives; the uncertainty that attaches to whether farmers will adopt the better crop; the uncertainty that market prices will change by the time a new cultivar is ready for release; the uncertainty that some other smart bunch of researchers will develop a superior variety before yours is ready are all issues that keep agricultural researchers tossing in their beds.
Despite the importance of uncertainty, the authors give little attention to how this should be accommodated in the prioritisation of projects.
"Science under scarcity" is intended for analysts working in agricultural research systems. It is intended, by the authors, to be of direct interest to research administrators. Anybody seeking tools to use in the evaluation of research should take the opportunity to examine what economists have to offer. When reading the book, my grandfather's wisdom should also be kept in mind - especially the thought that people in glasshouses should not throw stones.
Any claims made by authors in the Australian New Crops Newsletter are presented by the Editors in good faith. Readers would be wise to critically examine the circumstances associated with any claims to determine the applicability of such claims to their specific set of circumstances. This material can be reproduced, with the provision that the source and the author (or editors, if applicable) are acknowledged and the use is for information or educational purposes. Contact with the original author is probably wise since the material may require updating or amendment if used in other publications. Material sourced from the Australian New Crops Newsletter cannot be used out of context or for commercial purposes not related to its original purpose in the newsletter
Contact: Dr Rob Fletcher, School of Land and Food, The University of Queensland Gatton College, 4345; Telephone: 07 5460 1311 or 07 5460 1301; Facsimile: 07 5460 1112; International facsimile: 61 7 5460 1112; Email:
r.fletcher@mailbox.uq.edu.au[
New Crops Home Page] [New Crops Program] [Australian New Crops Newsletter] [New Crops Publications] [Order Form] [People] [Crop Profiles] [Other Resources]originally created by:
GK; latest update 6 June 1999 by: RF