The value of agricultural research

There are significant differences between private and public agricultural research, and the funding required to sustain these efforts.  In the end, however, the resulting benefits create the value.

Private research is more easily directed by vested interest, as the funding is internal to the company or companies involved, and the desired outcome may have already been determined.  If that sounds like a slam against the process, I don’t mean it to be.  I have seen enough first-hand evidence of the social and environmental responsibility held by chemical and seed manufacturers to know that their research isn’t just a matter of dollar signs.

Public research, however, is endowed with a greater responsibility to sponsors, including government, to ensure that public interest is served by the research and its results.  It also means that measuring the benefit of funding is necessary in order to prove the value of ongoing investment in innovation.

In December 2007, the University of Guelph released a report, prepared by Deloitte and Touche LLP, which measured the annual return on investment of their 10-year research funding relationship with the Ontario Ministry of Agriculture, Food and Rural Affairs.  Since 2006, the ministry has provided the university with approximately $54 million a year.  The university manages those funds to provide agricultural research and development, and educational programs.  Deloitte calculated the annual return to be $1.15 billion, which is a 20:1 benefit – cost ratio.

This endeavour to quantify the economic impact of research funding is an admirable attempt to make the process transparent.  Although the results are likely on the extreme high side, due to the data from previous studies used for the assessment, this is not a simple calculation to take on, so kudos for the effort.  Some review may be required as it is vitally important that the numbers stand up to rigourous examination, especially when publishing the results, as someone will always question the measurement’s validity. 

The university’s openness in accounting for those research dollars, and in highlighting the return on investment of public funds as well as the need for continued agricultural research is commendable.

With environmental and health concerns what they are today, agricultural research can, and in the future likely will, impact everyone on the planet.  That, in itself, is justification for funding socially beneficial research such as enhancing a crop’s yield potential, preventing disease in livestock, developing alternative uses for plants, and improving food production processes.  The long term benefits seem clear.