Abstract
The study used contingent valuation to solicit monetary values from researchers and farmers on how much they were willing to sell and buy agricultural innovations from research respectively. A probit model was then employed to identify the determinants of researchers’ willingness to sell innovations from research. Furthermore, a multivariate (MV) probit model was estimated to explain key determinants of farmers’ willingness to pay (WTP) for such innovations (technologies). Multi-stage sampling methods were used to obtain data from 360 farmers and 51 research scientists for the study. Though majority of farmers were willing to pay for agricultural innovations, the amounts they were prepared to pay (average of GH₵6.00), were far less than what the researchers wanted them to pay (average of GH₵50.00). The probability of a researcher accepting payment for innovations from research was high for the following categories of researchers: younger researchers; researchers who were members of professional bodies; and researchers with a high number of publications. The following categories of farmers also had a higher probability of paying for research output: younger farmers; farmers with high level of formal education; native farmers; farmers who had contacts with extension staff; and farmers with high income from their previous farming and non-farming activities. Considering the wide disparity between researchers’ WTA payment for innovations and farmers’ WTP, commercialization of research is possible but cannot be run on full cost-recovery. Government should therefore set up a statutory fund dedicated to agricultural research as a way of subsidizing agricultural innovations. Key words: Agricultural innovations, contingent valuation, multivariate probit model, willingness to pay, willingness to accept, probit model.
Highlights
Technology transfer and adoption have been identified as key to improving agricultural productivity, but funding of research and technology dissemination has been a challenge to public research institutions and universities
About 16.7% of respondents saw service charges from the sale of innovations as a source of motivation and incentive to researchers, and the remaining 13.3% thought that research commercialization would improve access to research innovations and extension services
The results suggests a positive influence on the respondents willingness to pay (WTP) for farm management and record keeping techniques and improved seed at significance levels of 1% and 10% respectively
Summary
Technology transfer and adoption have been identified as key to improving agricultural productivity, but funding of research and technology dissemination has been a challenge to public research institutions and universities It is against this background that research commercialization is strongly advocated by policy makers. Ghana has taken steps to operationalize research commercialization and to ensure that there is benefit to the end users of research products and to researchers This has led to the enactment of laws on Intellectual Property (IP) rights. Notable among them is the enactment of a new law called the Plants and Fertilizer Act 2010, (and a Plant Breeder’s bill is currently before Ghana’s Parliament awaiting to be passed into law) These policy regulations and laws are necessary but not sufficient condition for improving Ghana’s agricultural productivity. What is often over looked is the demand for the other components of crop management necessary for farm productivity: soil fertility management, field crop protection and post-harvest techniques, in a research commercialization regime
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Free) 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call
