Publicly-funded UK agricultural R&D and 'social' total factor productivity
Publicly-funded UK agricultural R&D and 'social' total factor productivity
复制标题
DOI：
10.1111/j.1574-0862.2002.tb00105.x
复制
发表时间：
2002-05-01
影响因子：
4.1
通讯作者：
Barnes, AP
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Barnes, AP
大多数与衡量公共资助农业研发投资回报率有关的研究都发现，高回报表明投资不足，要求增加支出的呼声一直很常见。然而，回报的评估倾向于根据市场投入和产出来衡量研究支出对全要素生产率(TFP)增长的影响。与公众对追求农业生产率增长的环境影响日益感到不安相比，TFP指数成为衡量增长的误导性指标。本文将一些非市场成分纳入全要素生产率指数。农业生产的两种特殊外部性，即化肥和农药污染的成本被纳入1948-1995年期间构建的全要素生产率指数。这一调整后的TFP指数是根据英国的公共研发支出来衡量的。与传统的TFP指数相比，农业研发的回报率是通过使用‘社会’来降低的。虽然两者都保持在合理的水平，但以前的研究似乎高估了农业研发支出的影响。此外，随着政策朝着动物福利、农村多样化和有机耕作等更能为社会接受但不能提高生产力的成果转变，未来分析农业研发回报的框架不应过于依赖生产率增长作为研究成效的指标。(C)2002 Elsevier Science B.V.保留所有权利。
Most studies concerned with measuring the rate of return to publicly-funded agricultural R&D investment have found high returns, suggesting under-investment, and calls for increased expenditure have been common. However, the evaluation of returns tends to measure the effect of research expenditure against growth in total factor productivity (TFP), based on market inputs and outputs. When compared against growing public unease over the environmental effects of pursuing agricultural productivity growth, TFP indices become a misleading measure of growth. This paper integrates some non-market components into the TFP index. The costs of two specific externalities of agricultural production, namely fertiliser and pesticide pollution, are integrated in a TFP index constructed for the period 1948-1995. This adjusted, or 'social', TFP index is measured against UK public R&D expenditures.The rates of return to agricultural R&D are reduced by using the 'social' as opposed to the traditional TFP index. Whilst both remain at justifiable levels, previous studies appear to have over-estimated the effect of agricultural R&D expenditures. Furthermore, with changes in policy towards more socially acceptable but non-productivity enhancing outcomes, such as animal welfare, rural diversification and organic fanning, the future framework for analysing returns to agricultural R&D should not be so dependent on productivity growth as an indicator of research effectiveness. (C) 2002 Elsevier Science B.V. All rights reserved.