Ag research and water - what a combination! Genevieve K. Croft wrote the CRS report (24 September 2020): 'Agricultural Research - Background and Issues'
Click on the graphics to enlarge them. The graphics don't appear in the same location as they do in the report.
Download CRS_Report_Ag_Research_Background_Issues_24Sept2020
Overview
The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) Research, Education, and Economics(REE) mission area funds billions of dollars annually for biological, physical, and social science research that is related to agriculture, food, and natural resources. Four agencies carry out REE responsibilities: the Agricultural Research Service (ARS), the National Institute of Food and Agriculture (NIFA), the National Agricultural Statistics Service (NASS), and the Economic Research Service (ERS). The Under Secretary for REE, who oversees the REE agencies, holds the title of USDA Chief Scientist and is responsible for coordinating research, education, and extension activities across the entire department. The Office of the Chief Scientist (OCS)—a staff office within the Office of the Under Secretary for REE—supports this coordination role. Discretionary funding for the REE mission area totaled approximately $3.4 billion in FY2020, and mandatory funding from the 2018 farm bill adds another $177 million per year on average.
USDA administers federal funding to states and local partners through its extramural research agency: NIFA. NIFA administers this extramural funding through capacity grants (allocated to the states based on formulas in statute) and competitive grants (awarded based on a peer-review process). USDAalso conducts its own research at its intramural research agencies: ARS, NASS, and ERS.
Debates over the direction of public agricultural research and the nature of how it is funded continue. Ongoing issues include whether federal funding is sufficient to support agricultural research, education, and extension activities; the different roles of extramural versus intramural research; and the implications of allocating extramural funds via capacity grants versus competitive grants.
Many groups believe that Congress should increase support of U.S. agriculture through expanded federal support of research, education, and extension programs, whereas others believe that the private sector, not taxpayer dollars, should be used to support these activities.
Cutting to the chase:
Funding Agricultural Research: Looking Ahead
In a constrained budget environment, agriculture competes for federal funding against other federal priorities. Within the funding allocated for agriculture, agricultural research competes for funding against other agricultural programs, such as conservation, farm income and risk management programs, food safety inspection, rural development, and domestic and foreign food aid programs. Historically, Congress has not solely prioritized funding for agricultural research, education, and extension activities but has also prioritized funding for programs designed to provide more immediate benefits to farmers, such as income support and crop insurance.
Stakeholders have varying perspectives on the needs for federal investments in agricultural research. Some want more public spending on agricultural research to maintain U.S. competitiveness and to increase agricultural productivity and innovation in the face of growing food demand and increasing agricultural challenges (e.g., pests, natural disasters). Some argue that the stagnant growth in inflation-adjusted USDA funding for agricultural research, education, and extension over the past few decades has hindered the ability of the U.S. agricultural sector to stay productive and competitive.
New innovations and technologies related to production, processing, marketing, and natural resource management are widely acknowledged as essential for continued productivity gains and economic growth of the sector. Some argue that agriculture has not achieved the same priority level with policymakers as other sectors, such as health, and that U.S. agriculture will suffer over the long term because of a lack of new innovations. These critics argue that the lack of public investment in new agricultural innovations will have dire consequences in the future, especially given new and varied challenges, such as rising production costs; new pest and disease outbreaks; increasing frequency of extreme weather events, such as droughts and floods; and climate change. In a step toward increasing innovation for agricultural research, the 2018 farm bill authorized a new Agriculture Advanced Research and Development Authority (AGARDA) pilot program (P.L. 115-334, §7132) at USDA to carry out innovative research and to develop and deploy advanced solutions to agricultural threats. As of September 2020, this pilot program has not received appropriations.
In contrast to those calling for increased funding, some stakeholders argue that the federal government should have a limited role in funding agricultural research and that taxpayer dollars should not be used to support what they believe should be a private sector endeavor. Others believe that the states and the private sector should fill the research funding gap left by the federal government.
At the same time, while private sector funding has increased over time, some have expressed concerns that private sector funding focuses primarily on bringing existing technologies to market (i.e., more applied research) and does not focus on basic research to address challenges that the agricultural sector may face in the future, such as environmental sustainability or adaptation to climate change.
Finally, some advocates have argued that some of USDA’s research portfolio duplicates private sector activities on major crops, including corn, soybeans, wheat, and cotton. They argue that funding should be reallocated to basic, noncommercial research to benefit the public good that is not addressed through private efforts. Others point out that the major crops are economically important to the food, feed, and energy sectors and should continue to receive significant amounts of public funding, especially for emerging threats such as new pests and pathogens, limited water availability, and impacts of agriculture on human and environmental health.
Enjoy!
"The best lack all conviction, while the worst are full of passionate intensity." - W.B. Yeats
Comments