By Stephanie Mercier
Senior Policy and Advocacy Adviser for the Farm Journal Foundation
Under the Trump administration, the scientific community has entered a new era of significant budget austerity, and this has been especially challenging for institutions that have historically received public funds to conduct research on global issues.
One reason why it has been so easy for this administration to target international programs is due to how the federal appropriations process works. Federal funding for agricultural research typically gets lumped into two categories: domestic agricultural research or international agricultural research.
Under this distinction, “domestic” programs include research primarily conducted by scientists at U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) agencies, through grants to U.S. universities and other research institutions, or through competitive grant programs such as the Agricultural and Food Research Initiative (AFRI). Meanwhile “international” research programs were primarily supported by grants from the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) to U.S. universities or other institutions working with international or foreign research organizations. Since 2010, much of this work was conducted through Feed the Future Innovation Labs, where U.S. universities established research and development centers on specific topics, relying on extensive partnerships with scientists at international organizations such as the CGIAR system and universities in developing countries.
In fact, this is a fairly artificial distinction, as the ability to benefit from research and innovation is not restricted by international borders or where the research was conducted. In 2019, I was involved in a study commissioned by the U.S. Board for International Food and Agricultural Development (BIFAD) to look at how international agricultural research and development benefits the U.S., working with Dr. Joe Glauber from IFPRI and Dr. David Kraybill from Ohio State University. That paper can be found here.
In broadest terms, our research showed that there is an extensive body of economic evidence showing that there are consistently high returns from public investment in agricultural research, both from a domestic perspective and an international perspective. For example, research published in 2022 by economists at USDA’s Economic Research Service found that for each public dollar spent on agricultural research between 1900 and 2011, $20 in benefits were generated for the U.S. economy.
With respect to U.S. investments in international agricultural R&D programs, the evidence of significant returns to American agriculture is robust as well. A 1996 research paper found that U.S. farmers received benefits estimated at $3.4 billion to $15.6 billion between 1960 and 1993 from new varieties of wheat and rice developed at two international research centers of the CGIAR system, CIMMYT (for corn and wheat) and IRRI (for rice), due to higher crop yields and more pest and disease-resistent crops.
Supporting agricultural research and development, especially when it helps developing countries’ economies grow, is also good for U.S. trade. For example, developing countries accounted for 54 percent of U.S. agricultural exports on average between 2000-2004, but by the 2020-2024 period, this export share had risen significantly to 68 percent.. These gains occurred largely because many economies in developing countries have gotten stronger, led by their agricultural sectors. A major contributing factor for this improvement has been greater investments in international agricultural R&D by the U.S. and other donor countries since the international food price spikes of 2007-08.
Evidence shows that the U.S. government’s international ag R&D portfolio benefits American consumers as well. For instance, after a new disease known as coffee leaf rust emerged in Central and South America in 2011, the USDA and the Foundation for Food and Agriculture Research (FFAR) invested in research to develop rust-resistant varieties of arabica coffee, even though domestic coffee production (only in Hawaii) accounts for less than one percent of total U.S. coffee consumption. U.S. consumers benefited by the adoption of these new varieties in coffee-producing regions in the Western Hemisphere because it allowed coffee production to stabilize, minimizing price increases for an American public that consumes more coffee per year than any other country in the world.
Clearly, agricultural research and development creates multiple advantages for the U.S., benefiting farmers, consumers, and trade. As this administration seeks to reduce federal budgets, it should take a more nuanced approach, rather than eliminating programs that are deemed “international” due to their appropriations category. As we look toward the future, farmers and our food system face increasing threats from political and trade instability, extreme weather, and volatile market prices. Investments in agricultural research and development are investments in the future, to ensure that we can face challenges ahead and have enough safe, affordable food for everyone.
