Biotechnology Fosters New Era In Agricultural Investigation

Demographers from the World Bank, the United Nations, and the Global Committee of Parliamentarians on Population Development all predict that between now and the year 2000 the world's population will soar by at least 20% to more than 6 billion, with 90% of this growth occurring in developing countries. With this growth, of course, will come an increased strain on already burdened food supplies, especially in the developing world, where hunger is a major problem. A decade from now, the current approach to alleviating world hunger - shipping surplus food from the "have" countries to the "have-nots" - will no longer be an effective solution. On the other hand, agricultural research leading to increased crop yields is more promising as a long-term approach to overcoming inadequate food production, one that the biotechnology revolution of the last two decades has put within reach. Today, researchers are applying their skills with the belief that the development of disease and pest-resistant cultivars, as well as high-yielding strains of cereals, legumes, and root crops could, in concert with a well-organized global food policy, eliminate hunger one day. Which nations are working hardest on increased crop yield research? Are the developed food-rich countries, like the United States and those of Western Europe, producing most of the research? What about the hungry countries, many of which are in Africa and Asia? To answer these questions, The Scientist consulted the 1988 Research Front database of specialty areas compiled by the Institute for Scientific Information in Philadelphia. Thirty-three specialties that represent crop yield research were identified (see box on page 33). A statistical analysis of some 2,400 papers contained in these 33 specialties yielded a country-by-country breakdown of agricultural research currently being conducted. Grouping the individual countries into eight major geographic regions produced an even richer harvest of information (see accompanying table). North America (the U.S. and Canada) clearly dominates in the field of increased crop yield research. In 1988, the U.S. and Canada conducted more than 53% of this research worldwide, according to ISI's data. Western Europe, which ranks second, contributed roughly half as much as North America. Third-ranking Asia and fourth-ranking Australia/New Zealand each produced approximately 7% of the world's agricultural research. The rest of the world - Eastern Europe/Soviet Union, the Middle East, Africa, and Latin America, ranking fifth through eighth, respectively - each contributed less than 2% of this research, yielding a combined total of just under 7%. The picture changes dramatically, however, when one compares each region's efforts in agriculture with its contributions to science overall, as represented in ISI's 1988 Research Front database (see "% Expected" column in table). By comparing a region's actual output with its expected share, it is possible to calculate a relative percentage of participation in crop yield research (see third column, "% Actual: Expected," in table). The result? The "clearly dominant" North America drops to fifth position, performing only 16% above expectation. Western Europe and Asia drop as well (sixth and seventh positions, respectively); but unlike North America, both of these regions contribute less than what one would expect. Region % Actual % Expected % Actual: Expected 1. North America 53.5 46.0 +16 2. Western Europe 25.8 31.6 -18 3. Asia 7.2 9.8 -27 4. Australia/New Zealand 6.9 2.6 +165 5. E. Europe/USSR 1.9 6.5 -71 6. Middle East 1.8 1.3 +38 7. Africa 1.6 0.9 +78 8. Latin America 1.3 1.1 +18 N. Hemisphere 87 90 -3 S. Hemisphere 13 10 +30 Source: ISI's Research Front Database, 1988 In contrast, Australia/New Zealand rises to first position, with regard to that region's relative performance. This region has contributed 165% more than its expected share of the world's agricultural research. Africa, which ranks seventh in agricultural research and eighth overall, climbs dramatically to rank second, contributing 78% more than expected. The Middle East moves to third; Latin America, fourth; and Eastern Europe/Soviet Union, which performs 70% below its expected baseline, falls to eighth position. At first glance, it is tempting to conclude that those regions that have suffered famines in the past (or those where famine is a problem at present) have devoted relatively more of their research to agriculture than those areas that have not experienced famines. Africa, the Middle East, and Latin America, which moved up considerably within the rankings in terms of actual versus expected participation, have all endured major famines throughout the second half of the 20th century. It is therefore perhaps not surprising that scientists in these regions have concentrated their research efforts on increasing crop yields in their homelands rather than the problem of, say, giant flux creep in the new superconducting materials. Says John W. Mellor, director of the International Food Policy Research Institute in Washington, D.C., "The importance of agricultural research to hunger alleviation is underlined by the fact that developing countries have now largely run out of new land, and so nearly all their production increases now come from yield increases." An exception to this seems to be Asia, which has experienced many famines but performed 27% below its expected baseline. A closer look at the performances of individual countries in this region may help to clarify the phenomenon. Bang-ladesh, India, Malaysia, the Philippines, and Thailand all have dedicated relatively more research to agriculture than to science in general. In fact, two of these countries are home to world-class agricultural research centers: the International Rice Research Institute in Manila and the International Crops Research Institute for the Semi-Arid Tropics in Andhra Pradesh, India. (Indeed, in 1988 alone, the Philippines participated in crop yield research at an astounding rate of 4,600% above expectation.) The research front database at the Institute for Scientific Information is drawn from some 3,200 high-impact international journals. Thus, the analysis presented here reflects the world's agricultural studies published only in these journals. To conduct this study, approximately 50 key words and phrases related to crop yield research and particular crops were run through the database. he following are the 33 specialty areas selected from ISI's 1988 Research Fronts: Effects of nitrogen nutrition on crop yields Barley yield Iron, aluminum, and mineral uptake in sorghum genotypes Effects of soil loosening and water transport Effects of rainfall infiltration and soil properties on crop yield Crop yield and disease resistance Crop yield and limited irrigation and agricultural drought Effects of salts on wheat and rice cultivars Crop water-stress Effects of saline media on nitrogen uptake in rice Salinity and rice leaves Salinity of paddy soils Freezing tolerance and cold hardiness of winter wheat Maize populations Nitrogen accumulation and high-yielding maize Corn yield and root density, water extraction Relief food in Bangladesh Adoption of new agricultural practices Dynamics of food resources Ecological stability: effects on food web Intergeneric hybrids in perennial triticeae Effects of global climate change on wheat seedlings Drought-resistant wheat Effects of calcareous soils on rice yields Freezing tolerance and chilling stress of rye Nitrogenase activity and rice yield Seasonal accumulation of labeled fertilizer nitrogen in rice fields Ecology of deep-water rice fields Desiccation tolerance and seedling growth Agricultural development policy in Asia Yield of agricultural crops Agricultural production potentials: the crisis in Africa, and farmer participatory research Agricultural income distribution in developing countries --A.M. Why, then, does Asia have an overall negative rating? One reason may be that China - the country with the most mouths to feed - according to ISI's database, contributed very little to agricultural research, performing 48% below what would be expected. Another reason may be the lower-than-expected participation of China's neighbor, Japan. Although Japan is Asia's most active country when it comes to scientific research, its efforts in hunger-related research are 73% below expectation. Japan's increasing population and decreasing arable land, however, may prompt this country toward hardier agricultural research in the future. Perhaps most puzzling is the abundant harvest of crop yield research from Australia and New Zealand. Australia's bountiful contribution is to be expected, says Ernest Corea, senior information officer at the Consultative Group on International Agricultural Research (CGIAR), headquartered in Washington, D.C. "Some of the ecological conditions of Australia are shared with the ecological conditions in developing countries," he says. Also, since Australia is geographically close to Asia, "it has also been very interested in the hunger situation there." Although Australia's interest in crop research may have humanitarian roots, says Kenneth Warren, director for science at Maxwell Communication Corp., in New York, economics plays a crucial role as well. "Money drives research," he says. In fact, Australia and New Zealand export almost half the cereals they produce. Corea adds that some of the regions that do not match Australia's performance record do support agricultural research in developing countries through funding. "Consistent funding for CGIAR over the past 18 years," says Corea, "represents a commitment by donors to support agricultural research as a mechanism for alleviating hunger in the world." Indeed, in 1988, 23 countries donated a little under $184 million - or 73% of all donor contributions - to programs sponsored by CGIAR. Fourteen countries in Western Europe alone contributed 42% of those funds. Asia, which also performed below expectation, supported agricultural research through monetary donations; contributing about 13% of the country-donated funds, with most of the money coming from Japan. The regional breakdown of the rest of the funds donated by countries is as follows: North America, 42%; Australia, 2.3%; Africa, 0.1%; and Latin America, .01%. Although the Middle East did not contribute to CGIAR-sponsored programs in 1988, Iran and Saudi Arabia have done so in the past. Eastern Europe and the Soviet Union, however, have never financially supported agricultural research at CGIAR-sponsored facilities. However, notes Corea, "I do not know what percentage of their [Eastern Europe and the Soviet Union] domestic research budgets is spent on agricultural research, or to what extent they support national agricultural research systems in developing countries." With the changing political climate in that part of the world, however, Mellor sees the possibility of change. "The Eastern European countries," he says, "are not pulling their weight in either international efforts or on their own problems. One of the many benefits to come from the present turmoil and change will perhaps be greater participation in global research efforts, to the benefit of all parties." Governments, however, are not the only source of financial support for agricultural research. Private foundations like the Rockefeller Foundation in New York, and international groups, such as the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC), the United Nations, the Asian and African Development Banks, and the World Bank, have also donated funds to CGIAR-sponsored programs - programs that Mellor laments will be underfunded by over 10% in 1990. Seen from an even more aggregated perspective, the Northern Hemisphere, while contributing most of the money and roughly 87% of the crop yield research in 1988, fell 3% below its expected share. The developing Southern Hemisphere, on the other hand, which contributed only 13% of the research in this area, is actually producing 30% above its expected research baseline. "The developed countries," says Mellor, "command the bulk of the world's scientific resources, including those in agriculture. By not pulling their own weight in such research, the developed countries not only fail the hungry of the world, but fail to achieve benefits themselves from growth in global prosperity." Why, then, does Asia have an overall negative rating? One reason may be that China - the country with the most mouths to feed - according to ISI's database, contributed very little to agricultural research, performing 48% below what would be expected. Another reason may be the lower-than-expected participation of China's neighbor, Japan. Although Japan is Asia's most active country when it comes to scientific research, its efforts in hunger-related research are 73% below expectation. Japan's increasing population and decreasing arable land, however, may prompt this country toward hardier agricultural research in the future. Perhaps most puzzling is the abundant harvest of crop yield research from Australia and New Zealand. Australia's bountiful contribution is to be expected, says Ernest Corea, senior information officer at the Consultative Group on International Agricultural Research (CGIAR), headquartered in Washington, D.C. "Some of the ecological conditions of Australia are shared with the ecological conditions in developing countries," he says. Moreover, since Australia is geographically close to Asia, "it has also been very interested in the hunger situation there." Although Australia's interest in crop research may have humanitarian roots, says Kenneth Warren, director for science at Maxwell Communication Corp., in New York, economics plays a crucial role as well. "Money drives research," he says. In fact, Australia and New Zealand export almost half the cereals they produce. Corea adds that some of the regions that do not match Australia's performance record do support agricultural research in developing countries through funding. "Consistent funding for CGIAR over the past 18 years," says Corea, "represents a commitment by donors to support agricultural research as a mechanism for alleviating hunger in the world." Indeed, in 1988, 23 countries donated a little under $184 million - or 73% of all donor contributions - to programs sponsored by CGIAR. Fourteen countries in Western Europe alone contributed 42% of those funds. Asia, which also performed below expectation, supported agricultural research through monetary donations; it contributed about 13% of the country-donated funds, with most of the money coming from Japan. The regional breakdown of the rest of the funds donated by countries is as follows: North America, 42%; Australia, 2.3%; Africa, 0.1%; and Latin America, .01%. Although the Middle East did not contribute to CGIAR-sponsored programs in 1988, Iran and Saudi Arabia have done so in the past. Eastern Europe and the Soviet Union, however, have never financially supported CGIAR-sponsored research. However, notes Corea, "I do not know what percentage of their [Eastern Europe and the Soviet Union] domestic research budgets is spent on agricultural research, or to what extent they support national agricultural research systems in developing countries." With the unsettled political climate in that part of the world, however, Mellor sees the possibility of change. "The Eastern European countries," he says, "are not pulling their weight in either international efforts or on their own problems. One of the many benefits to come from the present turmoil and change will perhaps be greater participation in global research efforts, to the benefit of all parties." But governments are not the only source of financial support for agricultural research. Private foundations like the Rockefeller Foundation in New York, and international groups, such as the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC), the United Nations, and the World Bank, have also donated funds to CGIAR-sponsored programs - programs that Mellor laments will be underfunded by more than 10% in 1990. Seen from an even more aggregated perspective, the Northern Hemisphere, while contributing most of the money and roughly 87% of the crop yield research in 1988, fell 3% below its expected share. The developing Southern Hemisphere, on the other hand, which contributed only 13% of the research in this area, is actually producing 30% above its expected research baseline. This would seem to support the view that the developing world is trying to help itself, and that the developed world might do more to help its Southern neighbors. "The developed countries," says Mellor, "command the bulk of th27scientific resources, including those in agriculture. By not pulling their own weight in such research, the developed countries not only fail the hungry of the world, but fail to achieve benefits themselves from growth in global prosperity."

Biotechnology Fosters New Era In Agricultural Investigation

Interested in reading more?

Become a Member of