118 



INVESTING IN KESEAKCH 



research budget had the purchasing power of $788 

 million in 1982 dollars; the 1988 research budget was 

 valued at $778 million in 1982 dollars. In reality, any 

 past changes in agricultural research priorities had to 

 come from the redirection of funds within the research 

 budget Further redirection by increasing the invest- 

 ment in competitively awarded grants does not ad- 

 dress the problem of the continued federal underin- 

 vestment in research through USDA. It also raises the 

 real risk of destroying some of the "muscle" of current 

 high-quality research in intramural and formula-funded 

 research in attempts to cut out any "fat" 



Without some real growth in the USDA research 

 budget, there can be no realistic opportunity to broaden 

 the scope of science contributing to agricultural, food, 

 and environmental research. Many of the new scien- 

 tific opportunities that require costly supplies and 

 instrumentation will have to remain unexplored, and 

 few mullidisciplinary research teams will be able to be 

 formed to attack the mullifaceted problems of com- 

 petitiveness, food quality, and natural resources con- 

 fronting agriculture. 



The proposed increase in funding for competitive 

 research grants is justified. This proposal stands 

 strongly against reallocation within the USDA re- 

 search budget for the reasons given above. If no 

 growth in the USDA research budget is possible, then 

 decisions to redirect funds are judgments that elected 

 and other public officials may choose to consider. 



Reinvesting Subsidy Savings 



As U.S. agriculture gradually returns to a state of 

 economic health and as commodity prices return to 

 free-market conditions, the federal budget appropria- 

 tions currently used for price support programs may be 

 targeted for budgetary savings. Part of these savings 

 should be reinvested in research programs to strengthen 

 the knowledge that supports the nation's food and 

 fiber industries. 



Federal Investment 



Investments in agricultural research in the United 

 States have consistently shown high returns, as noted 

 previously. Such data demonstrate that an increased 

 investment in the agricultural, food, and environ- 

 mental research system will be paid back rapidly in 

 economic develqjment and other public benefits. 



The U.S. gross national product in 1987 was $4.5 

 trillion (Council of Economic Advisers, 1989). Of 



that, the agribusiness complex contributed approxi- 

 mately 18 percent, or roughly $815 billion (Harring- 

 ton et al., 1986). The current annual federal invest- 

 ment in agricultural R&D is about $ 1 .04 billion — less 

 than 0. 1 3 percent of agriculture's annual contribution 

 to the gross national product 



Investing Now 



A major increase in research fiinding of $500 

 million is needed at this time. The scientific opportu- 

 nities exist today to use this increased funding wisely. 

 The needed scientific talent is available now, primar- 

 ily through the nation's existing scientists in the physi- 

 cal, biological, engineering, and social sciences, as 

 well as those in agriculture and related disciplines, 

 who arc ready to compete for this new funding. In 

 addition, as noted above, increased funding will also 

 ensure the flow of young scientists into agriculture- 

 related research areas. 



To achieve the maximum effect, this substantial 

 increase should be enacted in a single year as a 

 reflection of the value of the broadened scope of 

 agricultural, food, and environmental research and the 

 importance of the sustained advancement of this sys- 

 tem to the U.S. economy. 



Given the overall fiscal problems facing the nation, 

 the appropriation of the full $500 million increase may 

 not be possible in a single year. Even so, a commit- 

 ment of this magnitude is essential. Any stepwise 

 increase in fiinding should provide the full increase as 

 soon as possible, preferably within 3 years, and be 

 balanced to address the needs and opportunities in 

 agricultiu^, food, and the environment 



CONCLUSION 



Agriculture is the world's oldest and largest indus- 

 try, and it has been a highly successful industry in the 

 United States. The United States is endowed with 

 perhaps the world's most extensive and abundant 

 complement of soils, water, and climate favorable for 

 agricultural production. Still, several other countries 

 have tremendous natural assets to draw upon in devel- 

 oping productive agricultural industries. One domi- 

 nant factor stands out in making possible the remark- 

 able pace of development of agriculture in this country 

 in contrast to that in other countries — the early and 

 very strong support given to agriculture by the U.S. 

 government Agriculture was the fu^t — and for a long 



