By: Tom Cherveny,
Funding for the basic research that makes
American agriculture a world leader in innovation and production is stagnant if
not in decline.
America used to account for 21 percent of all
research and development focused on agriculture in the world. Today, it is
China that holds that lead position. The U.S. investment has shrunk to 14
percent, according to Dr. Brian Buhr, head of the Department of Applied
Economics at the University of Minnesota. Buhr was part of a panel of U of M
department heads speaking at Farmfest on Thursday.
They urged more investment in research
funding, as well as strengthening the partnerships between producers, private industry
and education that made possible many of the innovations we now benefit by.
Buhr said that Minnesota’s investment in its
Agricultural Experiment Stations has remained stagnant or in decline since
1990. It is currently at about $45 million a year.
Unfortunately, private industry investment in
agricultural R & D is stagnant as well, according to Buhr.
Part of the problem is complacency, he said.
Companies are not making investments in long-term research due to the pressures
for short-term profits.
Yet the need for long-term research has never
been more important for agriculture. “Some of these issues that we see emerging
are very long term issues, sort of glacier in speed,’’ said Buhr. He cited
climate change, resistance by pests to controls, and a growing world population
and shrinking resource base to produce food as examples.
Buhr said public investment in research needs
to grow. Market incentives do not often exist for private industry to make R
& D investments that requires 20 or more years before returns can be
realized.
A regulatory system that unnecessarily
lengthens the time it takes to bring innovations to the market is a problem as
well, he said.
No state has more to gain from innovation
than Minnesota, according to research by the College of Applied Economics. For
every $1 in public funds expended on agricultural R & D, a $50 return is
realized. That compares to a $22 to $1 ratio nation-wide, according to Buhr.
Agricultural productivity grew by 1.75
percent to 2 percent annually in the 1990’s due to innovations resulting from
basic research undertaken 10 and 20 years earlier. Today, agriculture is seeing
productivity gains slow to about .5 percent per year, Buhr pointed out.
There is a ‘’brain drain’’ evident as well.
There are declines in the numbers of students in agricultural and biology
graduate programs, said Dr. Michael White, head of the Department of Animal
Sciences at the University of Minnesota.
The University speakers also noted that the
challenges of putting agricultural instructors in high schools across the state
are growing too. The vast majority of graduates in the College of Agriculture’s
educational program are lured to higher paying positions in private industry.
All of this comes as Dr. Eric Kaler,
president of the University of Minnesota, announced that he wants the
University to ramp up its commitment to agriculture.
“With our concentration of growers, food
producers and large, multi-national corporations in the food space, I think
Minnesota is equipped to become the Silicone Valley of the food industry,’’
said Kaler. “And I am going to advance that idea with state leaders as we move
in to the next legislative session.’’
Original Article Here
No comments:
Post a Comment