Skip to main content
Skip to main content

Advocacy in action: The current crisis in agricultural research

Advocacy in action
The current crisis in agricultural research

The efficiencies of production and wholesomeness and safety of the food we eat today is a direct result of the research emphasis placed on agriculture over the last 120 years. In 1887, congress passed the Hatch Act, which established funding to support land-grant universities and promote the advancement of US agriculture. According to the USDA Agriculture Census, in 1900 the value of all livestock and poultry was approximately $3.1 billion. In 2007, livestock and poultry value in the United States exceeded $132 billion. Much of this value was achieved through adoption of innovation and technology that improved production efficiencies, animal health, nutrition, genetics, housing, and animal-husbandry practices, while addressing many environmental, labor, and animal well-being concerns with an emphasis on producing wholesome, safe, plentiful, and inexpensive food for the world.

Unfortunately, public funding for basic agricultural research has declined in terms of real dollars. As prices for goods, utilities, and labor have increased, federal funding has remained largely constant at best. I would like to emphasize what I see as a serious funding shortage and concern regarding the shift in the source of funding we’re experiencing today and the move away from basic research. More often than ever before, agriculture is having to rely on private enterprises and government agencies not focused on agriculture for research funding. I find this a disturbing trend, as US agriculture is competing with other countries for access to foreign markets.

There are two key avenues within USDA for research funding: the Agricultural Research Service (ARS), which conducts in-house or intramural research projects within USDA, and the Competitive State Research, Education, and Extension Service (CSREES, renamed in 2009 the National Institute for Food and Agriculture), which funds extramural research at the state level through land-grant universities and the State Agricultural Experiment Stations (SAES).

Public agricultural research funding in the US is a federal-state partnership. The federal government funds research conducted through ARS and at state institutions such as the SAES and veterinary colleges. These institutions also receive funding from state legislatures, private sources, and federal agencies other than USDA. There was a period of sustained growth in public-funded agricultural research starting in the 1930s. This ushered in many of the technological advances and basic understanding of agricultural principles that have made American agriculture the worldwide leader in innovation and the efficient production of wholesome, safe, plentiful, and affordable food.

In recent years, however, the focus on funding basic agricultural research efforts has declined in terms of real dollars. This has not only limited the research projects that can be undertaken, but it has also affected the ability to hire and retain top researchers in agricultural fields, support programs at universities that encourage students to pursue advanced degrees in animal science and food-animal veterinary medicine, and maintain and enhance the research infrastructure. State funding has declined in recent years, with USDA funding remaining level at best.

Fortunately, there has been interest from the private sector and other federal agencies (the US Department of Energy, the National Institutes of Health [NIH], and the National Science Foundation) in funding agricultural research, so that, after accounting for inflation, overall funding levels have remained constant since 1980. In 1980, private investment of agricultural research and development surpassed public investment. Research funding from other federal agencies has increased as a proportion of the overall funding scheme supporting agricultural research. The question is, are these sources of funding targeting research that benefits all aspects of production agriculture? Are they funding the types of research programs that will not be done anywhere else (ie, long-term, basic, not-for-profit research projects) or cannot be done anywhere else (eg, foreign animal disease, zoonotic, or terrorism-related projects)? Who controls the results with privately funded research projects? Will the NIH fund projects benefiting animal health without a human-health component? What will be their research focus with zoonotic diseases – improving animal health or protecting human health?

Even more alarming to me is the trend of USDA spending on research projects within its own research agency. Between 1980 and the late 1990s, USDA funding at ARS declined, resulting in fewer research programs and a loss of scientists. Although funding in terms of real dollars has fluctuated back to 1980 levels, the number of scientists still does not match the 1980 number, according to the USDA’s own Economic Research Service report.

Policy advisors have recommended shifting public research efforts from applied to basic research. Just the opposite has occurred, however. The CSREES funding of basic research has declined, and privately-funded research tends to target more near-term applied projects. As a result, we lose the emphasis on the long-term research that promotes future innovations that will allow the US to continue to be a world leader in food production.

The following are some recent examples of funding issues of concern to me, specifically involving animal-health issues:

So, how can we in animal agriculture influence this trend in research funding? Some suggestions are as follows:

If you are interested in an in-depth review of the current situation involving agricultural research funding, I suggest you read the USDA’s Economic Research Service’s 2009 report entitled U.S. Public Agricultural Research: Changes in Funding Sources and Shifts in Emphasis, 1980-2005, available online at http://www.ers.usda.gov/Publications/EIB45/.

–Harry Snelson, DVM