Research-enabled growth in agricultural productivity is pivotal to sub-Saharan Africa’s overall economic growth prospects. Yet, investments in research and development (R&D) targeted to many national food and agricultural economies throughout Africa are fragile and faltering. To gain insight into what could be driving this trend, this article updates, summarizes and reassesses the published evidence on the returns to African agricultural R&D. Based on a compilation of 113 studies published between 1975 and 2014 spanning 25 countries, the reported internal rates of return (IRRs) to food and agricultural research conducted in or of direct consequence for sub-Saharan Africa averaged 42.3%py. In addition to the 376 IRR estimates, the corresponding 129 benefit-cost ratios (BCRs) averaged 30.1. Most (96.5%) of the returns-to-research evaluations are of publicly performed R&D, and the majority (87.6%) of the studies were published in the period 1990–2009. The large dispersion in the reported IRRs and BCRs makes it difficult to discern meaningful patterns in the evidence. Moreover, the distribution of IRRs is heavily (positively) skewed, such that the median value (35.0%py) is well below the mean, like it is for research done elsewhere in the world (mean 62.4%py; median 38.0%py). Around 78.5% of the evaluations relate to the commodity-specific consequences of agricultural research, while 5.5% report on the returns to an “all agriculture” aggregate. The weight of commodity-specific evaluation evidence is not especially congruent with the composition of agricultural production throughout Africa, nor, to the best that can be determined, the commodity orientation of public African agricultural R&D.
Kenya has been transformed into a net importer of maize, which is its major staple. As maize accounts for a major portion of calorific and protein intake for more than 90% of Kenyans, the fact that Kenya must increase farm productivity and income is no longer debatable. Past successes in maize production in Kenya were achieved by exploiting a synergy between technology development, dissemination, and seed multiplication and distribution programmes. However, lack of funding, poor linkages between research and farmers, lack of private investments in maize research, and human capital turnover are problems that need serious attention. Two stage linear regression analysis is used to calculate the rate of return to investment in Kenyan maize research for the 1955-1988 period. The result indicated that improvement in maize yield and expansion of maize area are explained by, inter alia, increase in research and extension expenditures and the spread of hybrid seed; yield is also positively influenced by use of fertilizer while greater area expansion is stimulated by higher maize producer prices. The results also indicate that maize research, extension and seed programmes contributed to attainment of higher maize yields, expansion of maize area and to growth in output.
The resources for agricultural and natural resources research have declined in Zambia. Therefore, there is a need to generate evidence on the rate of return (ROR) on past investments in sorghum research. Zambia's sorghum research programme has released seven widely adapted varieties and management practices. The objective of this study is to assess the socio-economic impact of sorghum research in Zambia from 1983 to 2010 and to assist in identifying priority areas for future research. A multistage sampling procedure was used in the study and a total of 278 farmers comprising 241 small-scale, 25 medium-scale and 12 commercial farmers was interviewed. A surplus approach was used to estimate the ROR to research and development investment. The Akino-Hayami and simple benefit-cost analysis techniques were used to estimate the ROR to investment. The estimated adoption rate in the sorghum producing sector in Zambia was 33.5%. Farmers identified early maturity, drought tolerance and high yield as the most important attributes of improved varieties. About half of the respondents cited a lack of improved seed and information as reasons for non-adoption. The estimated ROR for investment in sorghum research and complementary services ranged from 12% to 19%, depending on the future adoption path.
Addressing the multiple challenges facing global agriculture requires integrated innovation in areas such as seeds, biotechnology, crop protection, grain storage and transport. Innovations related to plant improvement and the development of new or improved plant varieties will only happen at an optimal level if plant breeders’ rights (PBR) are properly protected. The objective was to analyse the evolving landscape of wheat plant breeders’ rights to address the dearth of empirical evidence of the patterns and trends of wheat varietal improvements in South Africa. We compiled a detailed and novel count and attribute database of wheat varietal innovations in South Africa from 1979 to 2013 using various sources. This data set was then analysed to ascertain the main trends in, and ownership of PBRs for wheat varietal improvements in South Africa over this period. A total of 134 PBR wheat varietal innovations were lodged from 1979 to 2013, an average of 6 applications per year. The administrative delays in granting PBR applications were substantially reduced by 77 days during the post-deregulation period (after 1996), indicating increased efficiency. The main PBR applicants were Sensako (39%), the Agricultural Research Council Small Grains Institute (ARC-SGI) (25%) and Pannar (15%). The ARC-SGI contributed to some of the PBRs owned by private companies through shared genetic resources before Plant Variety Protection (PVP) was implemented. Future innovations and dissemination of wheat innovations can be stimulated by plant variety protection, together with broader variety sector legislation that encourages both public and private sector investment.
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.