Comparing modeling approaches for assessing priorities in international agricultural research
This article examines how the estimated impacts of crop technologies vary with alternate methods and assumptions, and also discusses the implications of these differences for the design of studies to inform research prioritization. Drawing on international potato research, we show how foresight scen...
| Main Authors: | , , , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Journal Article |
| Language: | Inglés |
| Published: |
Oxford University Press
2018
|
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | https://hdl.handle.net/10568/92040 |
| _version_ | 1855525959949615104 |
|---|---|
| author | Petsakos, Athanasios Hareau, Guy Kleinwechter, U. Wiebe, Keith D. Sulser, Timothy B. |
| author_browse | Hareau, Guy Kleinwechter, U. Petsakos, Athanasios Sulser, Timothy B. Wiebe, Keith D. |
| author_facet | Petsakos, Athanasios Hareau, Guy Kleinwechter, U. Wiebe, Keith D. Sulser, Timothy B. |
| author_sort | Petsakos, Athanasios |
| collection | Repository of Agricultural Research Outputs (CGSpace) |
| description | This article examines how the estimated impacts of crop technologies vary with alternate methods and assumptions, and also discusses the implications of these differences for the design of studies to inform research prioritization. Drawing on international potato research, we show how foresight scenarios, realized by a multi-period global multi-commodity equilibrium model, can affect the estimated magnitudes of welfare impacts and the ranking of different potato research options, as opposed to the static, single-commodity, and country assumptions of the economic surplus model which is commonly used in priority setting studies. Our results suggest that the ranking of technologies is driven by the data used for their specification and is not affected by the foresight scenario examined. However, net benefits vary significantly in each scenario and are greatly overestimated when impacts on non-target countries are ignored. We also argue that the validity of the single-commodity assumption underpinning the economic surplus model is case-specific and depends on the interventions examined and on the objectives and criteria included in a priority setting study. |
| format | Journal Article |
| id | CGSpace92040 |
| institution | CGIAR Consortium |
| language | Inglés |
| publishDate | 2018 |
| publishDateRange | 2018 |
| publishDateSort | 2018 |
| publisher | Oxford University Press |
| publisherStr | Oxford University Press |
| record_format | dspace |
| spelling | CGSpace920402025-11-29T05:22:16Z Comparing modeling approaches for assessing priorities in international agricultural research Petsakos, Athanasios Hareau, Guy Kleinwechter, U. Wiebe, Keith D. Sulser, Timothy B. research international organizations agriculture economic analysis research methods models technological changes forecasting commodities agricultural research technology welfare welfare economics prioritization planning multi-stakeholder processes trade econometric models impact assessment This article examines how the estimated impacts of crop technologies vary with alternate methods and assumptions, and also discusses the implications of these differences for the design of studies to inform research prioritization. Drawing on international potato research, we show how foresight scenarios, realized by a multi-period global multi-commodity equilibrium model, can affect the estimated magnitudes of welfare impacts and the ranking of different potato research options, as opposed to the static, single-commodity, and country assumptions of the economic surplus model which is commonly used in priority setting studies. Our results suggest that the ranking of technologies is driven by the data used for their specification and is not affected by the foresight scenario examined. However, net benefits vary significantly in each scenario and are greatly overestimated when impacts on non-target countries are ignored. We also argue that the validity of the single-commodity assumption underpinning the economic surplus model is case-specific and depends on the interventions examined and on the objectives and criteria included in a priority setting study. 2018-04-01 2018-04-09T16:36:01Z 2018-04-09T16:36:01Z Journal Article https://hdl.handle.net/10568/92040 en Open Access Oxford University Press Petsakos, A.; Hareau, G.; Kleinwechter, U.; Wiebe, K.; Sulser, T. 2018. Comparing modeling approaches for assessing priorities in international agricultural research. Research Evaluation. (United Kingdom). ISSN 0958-2029. 27(2): 145–156 |
| spellingShingle | research international organizations agriculture economic analysis research methods models technological changes forecasting commodities agricultural research technology welfare welfare economics prioritization planning multi-stakeholder processes trade econometric models impact assessment Petsakos, Athanasios Hareau, Guy Kleinwechter, U. Wiebe, Keith D. Sulser, Timothy B. Comparing modeling approaches for assessing priorities in international agricultural research |
| title | Comparing modeling approaches for assessing priorities in international agricultural research |
| title_full | Comparing modeling approaches for assessing priorities in international agricultural research |
| title_fullStr | Comparing modeling approaches for assessing priorities in international agricultural research |
| title_full_unstemmed | Comparing modeling approaches for assessing priorities in international agricultural research |
| title_short | Comparing modeling approaches for assessing priorities in international agricultural research |
| title_sort | comparing modeling approaches for assessing priorities in international agricultural research |
| topic | research international organizations agriculture economic analysis research methods models technological changes forecasting commodities agricultural research technology welfare welfare economics prioritization planning multi-stakeholder processes trade econometric models impact assessment |
| url | https://hdl.handle.net/10568/92040 |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT petsakosathanasios comparingmodelingapproachesforassessingprioritiesininternationalagriculturalresearch AT hareauguy comparingmodelingapproachesforassessingprioritiesininternationalagriculturalresearch AT kleinwechteru comparingmodelingapproachesforassessingprioritiesininternationalagriculturalresearch AT wiebekeithd comparingmodelingapproachesforassessingprioritiesininternationalagriculturalresearch AT sulsertimothyb comparingmodelingapproachesforassessingprioritiesininternationalagriculturalresearch |