Evaluating Returns to Agricultural Research: A Review
Identifieur interne : 001163 ( Istex/Corpus ); précédent : 001162; suivant : 001164Evaluating Returns to Agricultural Research: A Review
Auteurs : George W. Norton ; Jeffrey S. DavisSource :
- American Journal of Agricultural Economics [ 0002-9092 ] ; 1981-11.
Abstract
This paper reviews and compares the most common approaches used to evaluate public agricultural research investment. Ex post studies fall into two major groups: (a) consumer and producer surplus analyses, estimating average rates of return to research, and (b) production function analyses, estimating marginal rates of return to research. Ex ante studies fall into four groups: (a) those using scoring models to rank research activities, (b) those employing benefit-cost analysis to establish rates of return to research, (c) those using simulation models, and (d) those using mathematical programming to select an optimal mix of research activities.
Url:
DOI: 10.2307/1241211
Links to Exploration step
ISTEX:238AF99CB73FC00BD928D8939FF9DC5BD13E4E15Le document en format XML
<record><TEI wicri:istexFullTextTei="biblStruct"><teiHeader><fileDesc><titleStmt><title>Evaluating Returns to Agricultural Research: A Review</title><author><name sortKey="Norton, George W" sort="Norton, George W" uniqKey="Norton G" first="George W." last="Norton">George W. Norton</name><affiliation><mods:affiliation>Department of Agricultural Economics, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University</mods:affiliation></affiliation></author><author><name sortKey="Davis, Jeffrey S" sort="Davis, Jeffrey S" uniqKey="Davis J" first="Jeffrey S." last="Davis">Jeffrey S. Davis</name><affiliation><mods:affiliation>Australia</mods:affiliation></affiliation></author></titleStmt><publicationStmt><idno type="wicri:source">ISTEX</idno><idno type="RBID">ISTEX:238AF99CB73FC00BD928D8939FF9DC5BD13E4E15</idno><date when="1981" year="1981">1981</date><idno type="doi">10.2307/1241211</idno><idno type="url">https://api.istex.fr/document/238AF99CB73FC00BD928D8939FF9DC5BD13E4E15/fulltext/pdf</idno><idno type="wicri:Area/Istex/Corpus">001163</idno><idno type="wicri:explorRef" wicri:stream="Istex" wicri:step="Corpus" wicri:corpus="ISTEX">001163</idno></publicationStmt><sourceDesc><biblStruct><analytic><title level="a">Evaluating Returns to Agricultural Research: A Review</title><author><name sortKey="Norton, George W" sort="Norton, George W" uniqKey="Norton G" first="George W." last="Norton">George W. Norton</name><affiliation><mods:affiliation>Department of Agricultural Economics, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University</mods:affiliation></affiliation></author><author><name sortKey="Davis, Jeffrey S" sort="Davis, Jeffrey S" uniqKey="Davis J" first="Jeffrey S." last="Davis">Jeffrey S. Davis</name><affiliation><mods:affiliation>Australia</mods:affiliation></affiliation></author></analytic><monogr></monogr><series><title level="j">American Journal of Agricultural Economics</title><title level="j" type="abbrev">American Journal of Agricultural Economics</title><idno type="ISSN">0002-9092</idno><idno type="eISSN">1467-8276</idno><imprint><publisher>Oxford University Press</publisher><date type="published" when="1981-11">1981-11</date><biblScope unit="volume">63</biblScope><biblScope unit="issue">4</biblScope><biblScope unit="page" from="685">685</biblScope><biblScope unit="page" to="699">699</biblScope></imprint><idno type="ISSN">0002-9092</idno></series><idno type="istex">238AF99CB73FC00BD928D8939FF9DC5BD13E4E15</idno><idno type="DOI">10.2307/1241211</idno></biblStruct></sourceDesc><seriesStmt><idno type="ISSN">0002-9092</idno></seriesStmt></fileDesc><profileDesc><textClass></textClass></profileDesc></teiHeader><front><div type="abstract">This paper reviews and compares the most common approaches used to evaluate public agricultural research investment. Ex post studies fall into two major groups: (a) consumer and producer surplus analyses, estimating average rates of return to research, and (b) production function analyses, estimating marginal rates of return to research. Ex ante studies fall into four groups: (a) those using scoring models to rank research activities, (b) those employing benefit-cost analysis to establish rates of return to research, (c) those using simulation models, and (d) those using mathematical programming to select an optimal mix of research activities.</div></front></TEI><istex><corpusName>oup</corpusName><author><json:item><name>George W. Norton</name><affiliations><json:string>Department of Agricultural Economics, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University</json:string></affiliations></json:item><json:item><name>Jeffrey S. Davis</name><affiliations><json:string>Australia</json:string></affiliations></json:item></author><subject><json:item><value>literature review</value></json:item><json:item><value>public investment</value></json:item><json:item><value>research evaluation</value></json:item></subject><language><json:string>unknown</json:string></language><originalGenre><json:string>research-article</json:string></originalGenre><abstract>This paper reviews and compares the most common approaches used to evaluate public agricultural research investment. Ex post studies fall into two major groups: (a) consumer and producer surplus analyses, estimating average rates of return to research, and (b) production function analyses, estimating marginal rates of return to research. Ex ante studies fall into four groups: (a) those using scoring models to rank research activities, (b) those employing benefit-cost analysis to establish rates of return to research, (c) those using simulation models, and (d) those using mathematical programming to select an optimal mix of research activities.</abstract><qualityIndicators><score>8.152</score><pdfVersion>1.4</pdfVersion><pdfPageSize>498.78 x 717.12 pts</pdfPageSize><refBibsNative>false</refBibsNative><keywordCount>3</keywordCount><abstractCharCount>651</abstractCharCount><pdfWordCount>8319</pdfWordCount><pdfCharCount>52900</pdfCharCount><pdfPageCount>15</pdfPageCount><abstractWordCount>96</abstractWordCount></qualityIndicators><title>Evaluating Returns to Agricultural Research: A Review</title><genre><json:string>research-article</json:string></genre><host><volume>63</volume><publisherId><json:string>ajae</json:string></publisherId><pages><last>699</last><first>685</first></pages><issn><json:string>0002-9092</json:string></issn><issue>4</issue><genre><json:string>journal</json:string></genre><language><json:string>unknown</json:string></language><eissn><json:string>1467-8276</json:string></eissn><title>American Journal of Agricultural Economics</title></host><categories><wos><json:string>social science</json:string><json:string>economics</json:string><json:string>science</json:string><json:string>agricultural economics & policy</json:string></wos><scienceMetrix><json:string>economic & social sciences</json:string><json:string>economics & business </json:string><json:string>agricultural economics & policy</json:string></scienceMetrix></categories><publicationDate>1981</publicationDate><copyrightDate>1981</copyrightDate><doi><json:string>10.2307/1241211</json:string></doi><id>238AF99CB73FC00BD928D8939FF9DC5BD13E4E15</id><score>0.040531192</score><fulltext><json:item><extension>pdf</extension><original>true</original><mimetype>application/pdf</mimetype><uri>https://api.istex.fr/document/238AF99CB73FC00BD928D8939FF9DC5BD13E4E15/fulltext/pdf</uri></json:item><json:item><extension>zip</extension><original>false</original><mimetype>application/zip</mimetype><uri>https://api.istex.fr/document/238AF99CB73FC00BD928D8939FF9DC5BD13E4E15/fulltext/zip</uri></json:item><istex:fulltextTEI uri="https://api.istex.fr/document/238AF99CB73FC00BD928D8939FF9DC5BD13E4E15/fulltext/tei"><teiHeader><fileDesc><titleStmt><title level="a">Evaluating Returns to Agricultural Research: A Review</title><respStmt><resp>Références bibliographiques récupérées via GROBID</resp><name resp="ISTEX-API">ISTEX-API (INIST-CNRS)</name></respStmt></titleStmt><publicationStmt><authority>ISTEX</authority><publisher>Oxford University Press</publisher><availability><p>Copyright 1981 American Agricultural Economics Association</p></availability><date>1981</date></publicationStmt><sourceDesc><biblStruct type="inbook"><analytic><title level="a">Evaluating Returns to Agricultural Research: A Review</title><author xml:id="author-1"><persName><forename type="first">George W.</forename><surname>Norton</surname></persName><note type="biography">assistant professor</note><affiliation>assistant professor</affiliation><affiliation>Department of Agricultural Economics, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University</affiliation></author><author xml:id="author-2"><persName><forename type="first">Jeffrey S.</forename><surname>Davis</surname></persName><note type="biography">economist with the New South Wales Department of Agriculture</note><affiliation>economist with the New South Wales Department of Agriculture</affiliation><affiliation>Australia</affiliation></author></analytic><monogr><title level="j">American Journal of Agricultural Economics</title><title level="j" type="abbrev">American Journal of Agricultural Economics</title><idno type="pISSN">0002-9092</idno><idno type="eISSN">1467-8276</idno><imprint><publisher>Oxford University Press</publisher><date type="published" when="1981-11"></date><biblScope unit="volume">63</biblScope><biblScope unit="issue">4</biblScope><biblScope unit="page" from="685">685</biblScope><biblScope unit="page" to="699">699</biblScope></imprint></monogr><idno type="istex">238AF99CB73FC00BD928D8939FF9DC5BD13E4E15</idno><idno type="DOI">10.2307/1241211</idno></biblStruct></sourceDesc></fileDesc><profileDesc><creation><date>1981</date></creation><abstract><p>This paper reviews and compares the most common approaches used to evaluate public agricultural research investment. Ex post studies fall into two major groups: (a) consumer and producer surplus analyses, estimating average rates of return to research, and (b) production function analyses, estimating marginal rates of return to research. Ex ante studies fall into four groups: (a) those using scoring models to rank research activities, (b) those employing benefit-cost analysis to establish rates of return to research, (c) those using simulation models, and (d) those using mathematical programming to select an optimal mix of research activities.</p></abstract><textClass><keywords scheme="keyword"><list><head>Key words</head><item><term>literature review</term></item><item><term>public investment</term></item><item><term>research evaluation</term></item></list></keywords></textClass></profileDesc><revisionDesc><change when="1981-11">Published</change><change xml:id="refBibs-istex" who="#ISTEX-API" when="2016-12-22">References added</change></revisionDesc></teiHeader></istex:fulltextTEI><json:item><extension>txt</extension><original>false</original><mimetype>text/plain</mimetype><uri>https://api.istex.fr/document/238AF99CB73FC00BD928D8939FF9DC5BD13E4E15/fulltext/txt</uri></json:item></fulltext><metadata><istex:metadataXml wicri:clean="corpus oup" wicri:toSee="no header"><istex:xmlDeclaration>version="1.0"</istex:xmlDeclaration><istex:docType PUBLIC="-//NLM//DTD Journal Publishing DTD v2.3 20070202//EN" URI="journalpublishing.dtd" name="istex:docType"></istex:docType><istex:document><article article-type="research-article"><front><journal-meta><journal-id journal-id-type="hwp">ajae</journal-id><journal-id journal-id-type="publisher-id">ajae</journal-id><journal-title>American Journal of Agricultural Economics</journal-title><abbrev-journal-title>American Journal of Agricultural Economics</abbrev-journal-title><issn pub-type="ppub">0002-9092</issn><issn pub-type="epub">1467-8276</issn><publisher><publisher-name>Oxford University Press</publisher-name></publisher></journal-meta><article-meta><article-id pub-id-type="doi">10.2307/1241211</article-id><article-categories><subj-group subj-group-type="heading"><subject>Articles</subject></subj-group></article-categories><title-group><article-title>Evaluating Returns to Agricultural Research: A Review</article-title></title-group><contrib-group><contrib contrib-type="author"><name><surname>Norton</surname><given-names>George W.</given-names></name><role>assistant professor</role><aff><institution>Department of Agricultural Economics, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University</institution></aff></contrib><contrib contrib-type="author"><name><surname>Davis</surname><given-names>Jeffrey S.</given-names></name><role>economist with the New South Wales Department of Agriculture</role><aff><addr-line>Australia</addr-line></aff></contrib></contrib-group><pub-date pub-type="ppub"><month>11</month><year>1981</year></pub-date><volume>63</volume><issue>4</issue><fpage>685</fpage><lpage>699</lpage><history><date date-type="received"><month>11</month><year>1979</year></date><date date-type="accepted"><month>4</month><year>1981</year></date></history><copyright-statement>Copyright 1981 American Agricultural Economics Association</copyright-statement><copyright-year>1981</copyright-year><abstract><p>This paper reviews and compares the most common approaches used to evaluate public agricultural research investment. <italic>Ex post</italic> studies fall into two major groups: (<italic>a</italic>) consumer and producer surplus analyses, estimating average rates of return to research, and (<italic>b</italic>) production function analyses, estimating marginal rates of return to research. <italic>Ex ante</italic> studies fall into four groups: (<italic>a</italic>) those using scoring models to rank research activities, (<italic>b</italic>) those employing benefit-cost analysis to establish rates of return to research, (<italic>c</italic>) those using simulation models, and (<italic>d</italic>) those using mathematical programming to select an optimal mix of research activities.</p></abstract><kwd-group><title>Key words</title><kwd>literature review</kwd><kwd>public investment</kwd><kwd>research evaluation</kwd></kwd-group></article-meta></front></article></istex:document></istex:metadataXml><mods version="3.6"><titleInfo><title>Evaluating Returns to Agricultural Research: A Review</title></titleInfo><titleInfo type="alternative" contentType="CDATA"><title>Evaluating Returns to Agricultural Research: A Review</title></titleInfo><name type="personal"><namePart type="given">George W.</namePart><namePart type="family">Norton</namePart><affiliation>Department of Agricultural Economics, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University</affiliation><description>assistant professor</description><role><roleTerm type="text">author</roleTerm></role></name><name type="personal"><namePart type="given">Jeffrey S.</namePart><namePart type="family">Davis</namePart><affiliation>Australia</affiliation><description>economist with the New South Wales Department of Agriculture</description><role><roleTerm type="text">author</roleTerm></role></name><typeOfResource>text</typeOfResource><genre type="research-article" displayLabel="research-article"></genre><originInfo><publisher>Oxford University Press</publisher><dateIssued encoding="w3cdtf">1981-11</dateIssued><copyrightDate encoding="w3cdtf">1981</copyrightDate></originInfo><physicalDescription><internetMediaType>text/html</internetMediaType></physicalDescription><abstract>This paper reviews and compares the most common approaches used to evaluate public agricultural research investment. Ex post studies fall into two major groups: (a) consumer and producer surplus analyses, estimating average rates of return to research, and (b) production function analyses, estimating marginal rates of return to research. Ex ante studies fall into four groups: (a) those using scoring models to rank research activities, (b) those employing benefit-cost analysis to establish rates of return to research, (c) those using simulation models, and (d) those using mathematical programming to select an optimal mix of research activities.</abstract><subject><genre>Key words</genre><topic>literature review</topic><topic>public investment</topic><topic>research evaluation</topic></subject><relatedItem type="host"><titleInfo><title>American Journal of Agricultural Economics</title></titleInfo><titleInfo type="abbreviated"><title>American Journal of Agricultural Economics</title></titleInfo><genre type="journal">journal</genre><identifier type="ISSN">0002-9092</identifier><identifier type="eISSN">1467-8276</identifier><identifier type="PublisherID">ajae</identifier><identifier type="PublisherID-hwp">ajae</identifier><part><date>1981</date><detail type="volume"><caption>vol.</caption><number>63</number></detail><detail type="issue"><caption>no.</caption><number>4</number></detail><extent unit="pages"><start>685</start><end>699</end></extent></part></relatedItem><identifier type="istex">238AF99CB73FC00BD928D8939FF9DC5BD13E4E15</identifier><identifier type="DOI">10.2307/1241211</identifier><accessCondition type="use and reproduction" contentType="copyright">Copyright 1981 American Agricultural Economics Association</accessCondition><recordInfo><recordContentSource>OUP</recordContentSource></recordInfo></mods></metadata><covers><json:item><extension>tiff</extension><original>true</original><mimetype>image/tiff</mimetype><uri>https://api.istex.fr/document/238AF99CB73FC00BD928D8939FF9DC5BD13E4E15/covers/tiff</uri></json:item></covers><annexes><json:item><extension>pdf</extension><original>true</original><mimetype>application/pdf</mimetype><uri>https://api.istex.fr/document/238AF99CB73FC00BD928D8939FF9DC5BD13E4E15/annexes/pdf</uri></json:item></annexes><serie></serie></istex></record>Pour manipuler ce document sous Unix (Dilib)
EXPLOR_STEP=$WICRI_ROOT/Wicri/Agronomie/explor/SisAgriV1/Data/Istex/Corpus
HfdSelect -h $EXPLOR_STEP/biblio.hfd -nk 001163 | SxmlIndent | more
Ou
HfdSelect -h $EXPLOR_AREA/Data/Istex/Corpus/biblio.hfd -nk 001163 | SxmlIndent | more
Pour mettre un lien sur cette page dans le réseau Wicri
{{Explor lien
|wiki= Wicri/Agronomie
|area= SisAgriV1
|flux= Istex
|étape= Corpus
|type= RBID
|clé= ISTEX:238AF99CB73FC00BD928D8939FF9DC5BD13E4E15
|texte= Evaluating Returns to Agricultural Research: A Review
}}
| This area was generated with Dilib version V0.6.28. |  |