Technological innovation is vital to enhancing agricultural productivity and reducing poverty in many developing countries. Public investment in research and development has historically driven technological change in agriculture; however, recent trends suggest that the private sector may play a larger role in the future. Although there is optimism about the private sector's ability to generate new technologies relevant to developing-country agriculture, current levels of private investment remain low. The authors examine the determinants of private R&D investment in developing-country agriculture, the market, and institutional constraints that limit the growth of investment, and incentives that can promote more rapid investment growth. [EconLit classification: O300, Q160]. © 2010 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.
Unlike the public-sector research that launched the Green Revolution, private firms based in industrialised countries have done the majority of agricultural biotechnology research and almost all commercialisation of genetically modified (GM) crops. This paper examines consequences of the emergence of a few large companies as leaders in the commercialisation of biotechnology by addressing issues of access to technology, costs of conducting research and distribution of economic benefits. To provide context, we first review the status of crop-biotechnology research globally: who is benefiting from the technology? We then analyse the role of intellectual property rights, market access and industry concentration, public sector research and GM crop biosafety regulations in determining observed R&D by firms. The paper recommends policy measures that allow transfer of current technology to the poor and generate more biotechnology research focused on problems of the poor.
Purpose-Since the start of seed and other market reforms in the 1990s, the annual number of improved varietal releases for maize in Kenya has increased substantially. Prior to the reforms, private firms were restricted in introducing new varieties, could not protect their intellectual property, and farmers had to rely exclusively on the improved seeds developed and marketed by the public sector. Reforms have resulted in not only private firms entering the market and releasing improved varieties, but also an increase in varietal releases by the public sector. This paper reviews some of the key policy reforms related to maize in Kenya, and their impacts on varietal development and yields.
Tree-based intercropping (TBI) integrates tree production within annual grain cropping. The system is widely used in tropical regions, but is not common in temperate regions. This study evaluates the annualized return from TBI systems in southern Ontario, Canada against annual grain crop production. The TBI systems include hybrid poplar, Norway spruce, and red oak. The annualized return for all TBI systems is less than for annual cropping using the base prices; however, when tree prices are high and grain prices low the hybrid poplar TBI system has a higher return than annual cropping. Grants for planting trees, technologies to reduce the cost of establishing and maintaining trees, and improving the returns from tree production will be required for producers in temperate regions to adopt TBI systems.Un système de cultures intercalaires (SCI) intègre la production d'arbres dans la culture annuelle de céréales. Ce système est largement utilisé dans les régions tropicales, mais peu courant dans les régions tempérées. La présenteétudeévalue le rendement annualisé des SCI dans le sud de l'Ontario, au Canada, par rapportà celui de la production annuelle de céréales. Les SCI intègrent le peuplier hybride, l'épinette de Norvège et le chêne rouge. Le rendement annualisé des SCI est inférieurà celui des cultures annuelles si l'on utilise les prix de référence. Toutefois, lorsque les prix des arbres sontélevés et que les prix des céréales sont faibles, le SCI qui intègre le peuplier hybride obtient un rendement supérieurà celui des cultures annuelles. Pour que les agriculteurs des régions tempérées adoptent les SCI, il faudra offrir des subventionsà la plantation d'arbres, offrir des technologies qui permettront de réduire les coûts de plantation et d'entretien des arbres et améliorer les rendements/revenus de la production d'arbres.
Rwanda’s “Crop Intensification Program (CIP)” is primarily a land consolidation program aimed at improving agricultural productivity and food security. The program, which began in 2007, focuses on monocropping and commercialization of six priority crops: maize, wheat, rice, white potato, beans, and cassava. CIP has facilitated easy access to improved seed stocks, fertilizer, extension services, and postharvest handling and storage services. Although studies have documented the impact of CIP on changes in farm yield, incomes, and productivity, less is known about its impact on food prices. In this study, we examine the crop-food price differences in intensive monocropped CIP and non-intensive monocropped CIP zones in Rwanda. Specifically, the study evaluates price variations of beans and maize along with complementary food crops in intensive and non-intensive monocropped zones before and after the introduction of the CIP policy. We find that the CIP policy is not associated with differences in CIP crop prices between the intensive and non-intensive monocropped zones. Over time, prices increased for CIP crops but generally, the crop prices in the two zones were cointegrated. Prices for non-CIP crops in the two different zones did show price differentials prior to the implementation of CIP, with the prices in intensive monocropped zones being greater than in the non-intensive monocropped zones. Moreover, the prices in intensive areas are cointegrated with prices in non-intensive areas for maize and beans and these prices are converging. This indicates that farmers who intensively produced one CIP crop were able to go to the market and purchase other food crops and that price differences between zones have decreased over time, potentially making the CIP intensive farmers better off.
Purpose An extended period of economic growth along with stubborn childhood stunting and wasting levels raises questions about how consumer food purchasing behaviors respond to income increases in Rwanda. The purpose of this paper is to assess the role income, prices, policy, agricultural production, and market access play on how rural households purchase different food groups. Design/methodology/approach Six separate log-normal double hurdle models are run on six different food groups to examine what affects the probability a household purchases in each food group and for those who do purchase, what determines the quantity purchased. Findings Rural Rwandans are price and expenditure responsive but prices have more impact on food group purchases. Crop production resulted in reduced household market procurement for its associated food group but had mixed effects on the purchases of all other food groups. Rural Rwandans purchase and consume low amounts of animal-based proteins which may be a leading factor related to the high stunting and wasting rates. Owning an animal increased the purchased quantity of meat but lowered the purchased quantity of most other food groups. Practical implications Results suggest that policies and programs have to address multiple constraints simultaneously to increase the purchases of the limited food groups in the rural household diets that may be contributing to the high rates of stunting and wasting. Originality/value This study is the first to evaluate the interplay among prices, household income, household production, policies and donor programs, and demographic variables on rural Rwandan household food purchases.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.