AKST Systems in Latin America and the Caribbean: Evolution, Effectiveness and Impact | 97

Table 2-5. continued

Authors
Countries
Products/Levels
Rates of Return* (%)
Pino (1991)
Ecuador
Wheat
Potato
Maize
Beans
29
29
3
5
Palomino & Echeverria (1991)
Ecuador
Rice
34
Taxler (1992)
Mexico
Wheat
15-23
Cruz & Ávila (1992)
Andean Region
Aggregate
245
Vivas, Zuluaga & Castro (1992)
Colombia
Sugarcane
13
Racines (1992)
Ecuador
Palm oil
Soy
32
35
Palomino & Norton (1992)
Ecuador
Flint Maize
54
Byerlee (1994)
Latin America /
Caribbean
Mexico
Wheat
Wheat
81
53
Cap (1994)
Argentina
Beef cattle
Milk
Maize
Potato
Wheat
Other crops
74
55
77
69
67
54-59
Macagno (1994)
Argentina
Maize
Wheat
Other crops
47
32
34
Pena (1994)
Argentina
Potato
53-61
Romano, Bermeo & Torregrosa
(1994)
Colombia
Sorghum
70
Byerlee (1995)
Latin America
Wheat
82
Fonseca (1996)
Peru
Potato
26
Ortiz (1996)
Peru
Potato
30
Farfan (1999)
Colombia
Coffee
21-31
Manzano (1999)
Ecuador
Rice
58
Amores (1999)
Ecuador
Cacao
31

*Internal rates of return, except in the cases indicated with (**) which are estimates of the marginal internal rates of return.
Source: Adapted from Días Ávila et al., 2006.

growth rates declined. By contrast, growth rates increased in the Southern Cone countries, influenced mainly by increases in the productivity of the land both for crops and for livestock.

       Moreover, the restrictions imposed on public budgets for AKST in the last few decades have come precisely at a time when LAC’s producers have faced growing pressure to improve their productivity in order to compete at the international level in the context of free trade policies—those stemming from unilateral reforms implemented by the countries of the region, as well as those resulting from multilateral trade negotiations in GATT and the WTO, those corresponding to the different sub-regional integration initiatives (CARICOM, CAN, MERCOSUR, NAFTA), and a growing number of bilateral agreements signed by some countries, especially Mexico and Chile.

         It is also important to emphasize that the decline in public
investment in the AKST system in LAC has coincided

 
with new demands, associated with sustainable rural development, that have traditionally been assigned a low priority in the agendas of the region’s institutions.
        The most important of these demands are: (1) conservation of natural resources and the environment; (2) conservation and sustainable use of genetic and biodiversity resources; (c) the development of human resources and social capital as strategic assets for competitiveness and progress; (3) the empowerment of civil society; (4) proper attention to aspects related to gender and ethnicity; (5) the incorporation of new leading-edge technologies that require substantive changes in institutional structure and organization, such as biotechnology, genetic engineering, nanotechnology, telecommunications, and computer science; (6) emerging new topics or issues that may have significant impacts on production and on future food demand, e.g., biofuels; and (7) new demands linked to such issues as product differentiation and value added.