Financing Agricultural Value Chain RDE: An Alternative Approach with Examples from the Red Meat Industry

IF 0.3 Q4 AGRICULTURAL ECONOMICS & POLICY
S. Mounter, E. Fleming, G. Griffith
{"title":"Financing Agricultural Value Chain RDE: An Alternative Approach with Examples from the Red Meat Industry","authors":"S. Mounter, E. Fleming, G. Griffith","doi":"10.22004/AG.ECON.292473","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Agricultural RD&E managers have responded to the increased focus on value chains in food and agricultural product markets and most Australian agricultural RD&E corporations now have value chain programs embedded in their portfolios of funded projects. As community concerns have intensified within the social, environmental and public health spheres, the agricultural RD&E corporations also have started to invest some resources in areas of research which have externality implications. However, the assessment processes they use typically have not kept up with these changes, and some are questioning the basis of the current approaches when whole-of-chain and externality issues are important considerations. In this paper, the idea that agricultural value chain RD&E results in ‘chain goods’ is linked with Swann’s idea of a ‘club goods solution’ to research funding, to argue that a ‘chain goods solution’ can be a viable means of funding research activity that relates to agricultural value chains. Thus, members of a value chain need not rely solely on government to fund value chain RD&E. A set of criteria is suggested to determine who should fund RD&E activities in Australian agricultural value chains depending on the relative balance between expected private, chain and social benefits.","PeriodicalId":41561,"journal":{"name":"Australasian Agribusiness Review","volume":"22 1","pages":"45-64"},"PeriodicalIF":0.3000,"publicationDate":"2019-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Australasian Agribusiness Review","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.22004/AG.ECON.292473","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"AGRICULTURAL ECONOMICS & POLICY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Agricultural RD&E managers have responded to the increased focus on value chains in food and agricultural product markets and most Australian agricultural RD&E corporations now have value chain programs embedded in their portfolios of funded projects. As community concerns have intensified within the social, environmental and public health spheres, the agricultural RD&E corporations also have started to invest some resources in areas of research which have externality implications. However, the assessment processes they use typically have not kept up with these changes, and some are questioning the basis of the current approaches when whole-of-chain and externality issues are important considerations. In this paper, the idea that agricultural value chain RD&E results in ‘chain goods’ is linked with Swann’s idea of a ‘club goods solution’ to research funding, to argue that a ‘chain goods solution’ can be a viable means of funding research activity that relates to agricultural value chains. Thus, members of a value chain need not rely solely on government to fund value chain RD&E. A set of criteria is suggested to determine who should fund RD&E activities in Australian agricultural value chains depending on the relative balance between expected private, chain and social benefits.
农业价值链RDE融资:以红肉行业为例的另一种途径
农业研发与开发经理对食品和农产品市场中价值链的日益关注做出了回应,大多数澳大利亚农业研发与开发公司现在在其资助项目组合中嵌入了价值链项目。由于社区在社会、环境和公共卫生领域的关切日益加剧,农业研究与开发公司也开始在具有外部性影响的研究领域投入一些资源。然而,他们通常使用的评估过程并没有跟上这些变化,当整个链条和外部性问题是重要的考虑因素时,一些人正在质疑当前方法的基础。在本文中,农业价值链研发与开发导致“链式产品”的想法与Swann关于研究资助的“俱乐部产品解决方案”的想法联系在一起,认为“链式产品解决方案”可以成为资助与农业价值链相关的研究活动的可行手段。因此,价值链的成员不需要完全依赖政府来资助价值链的研发和改造。本文提出了一套标准,根据预期的私人、链条和社会效益之间的相对平衡,来确定谁应该为澳大利亚农业价值链中的研发与创新活动提供资金。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Australasian Agribusiness Review
Australasian Agribusiness Review AGRICULTURAL ECONOMICS & POLICY-
自引率
33.30%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信