THE YIELD GAP: CLOSING THE GAP BY WIDENING THE APPROACH

2016 ◽  
Vol 53 (3) ◽  
pp. 445-459 ◽  
Author(s):  
KATHERINE A. SNYDER ◽  
SRIYANIE MITHTHAPALA ◽  
ROLF SOMMER ◽  
JULIET BRASLOW

SUMMARYThe yield gap has arisen again as a focus for agricultural research to ensure food security and economic growth for farmers around the world. To examine this renewed interest, we carried out a review of key literature in the field of yield gap analysis to identify important gaps in research and analysis. In so doing, both the complexities in yield gap studies emerged along with some significant omissions. Much of the literature and research on the yield gap has been framed by larger concerns and initiatives to raise agricultural productivity. This focus has led to an emphasis on technical solutions such as crop breeding, fertilizer application and other methods to increase production. However, this concentration on the technical usually ignores the wider social, economic and political context that shapes farmer decision-making about agricultural production. This context can either discourage or enable farmers to close their yield gap. Additionally, the impact of increased agricultural production through certain technical solutions also often overlooks the wider impact on the landscape and the ecosystem services which underpin agricultural production and livelihoods. We argue that increasing agricultural productivity, and closing the yield gap, must be addressed with this broader approach.

1970 ◽  
Vol 10 (1) ◽  
pp. 88-99
Author(s):  
Barkat Ali Quraishi ◽  
Muhammad Jameel Khan

Reliable knowledge about the contribution of various factors responsible for increasing agricultural production is indispensable for planning. This holds particularly for the fertilizer use, which has been recognized as one of the quickest and, perhaps, the cheapest means for increasing agricultural produc¬tion. In Pakistan the emphasis on planned development is gaining momentum and for this purpose more data and fuller information on fertilizer response are becoming increasingly essential. The Agricultural Research Stations in the country have been conducting experiments with a view to determining the extent to which the cropped yield may increase due to the application of fertilizer. But such experiments, because of their somewhat controlled nature in respect of certain factors, obviously can¬not tell us with a desired measure of accuracy as to what is actually happening at millions of private farms throughout the country. And, as such, the planning in this regard is apt to be wrong.


2013 ◽  
Vol 27 (1) ◽  
pp. 131-141
Author(s):  
Narendra Kumar Bhatia ◽  
Mohammad Yousuf ◽  
Raman Nautiyal

Author(s):  
Alessandro Magrini

The objective of this paper is to assess the impact of public research expenditure on agricultural productivity in developed European countries. Our research provides original evidence, making possible a comparison with existing studies focused on United States of America (USA). We apply a fixed effects Gamma distributed-lag model to yearly data in 1970-2016 sourced from the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA), the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD), and the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO). In our results, public research expenditure has a significant impact on agricultural productivity up to 35 years, with peak at 17 years and long-term elasticity equal to 0.172. Based on our model, the countries with the highest internal rate of return of agricultural research expenditure resulted Germany, Spain, France and Italy (24.5-25.2%), followed by Netherlands, United Kingdom, Denmark, Greece, Belgium and Luxembourg (20.5-21.8%). However, only Germany, Denmark and Greece increased agricultural research expenditure in recent years. The estimated internal rates of return are in line with the ones reported by existing studies on USA, and they suggest that developed European countries, just like USA, could benefit from research investments in Agriculture to a much greater extent than they currently do.


2018 ◽  
Vol 165 ◽  
pp. 14-25 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tiemen Rhebergen ◽  
Thomas Fairhurst ◽  
Anthony Whitbread ◽  
Ken E. Giller ◽  
Shamie Zingore

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Juan R. Insua ◽  
Claudio F. Machado ◽  
Sergio C. Garcia ◽  
Germán D. Berone

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document