Transitioning from Professor to Professor of the Graduate School (POG)

On January 1, 2026, I will formally retire and transition to Professor of the Graduate School (POG). While my pension will cover my salary, I will continue to maintain an office at Berkeley, manage my research grants, and supervise graduate students. The practical effects of this transition are modest: I will no longer teach large undergraduate classes or attend routine faculty meetings, but I will gain greater flexibility to travel and to focus on research, mentoring, and outreach. This transition represents not a withdrawal from academic life, but a reallocation of effort toward the activities I value most.

This change marks the third stage of my lifelong association with Berkeley. Nearly fifty years ago, my Israeli professor, Eithan Hochman, received a letter from Alain de Janvry inviting students to apply to the Agricultural and Resource Economics (ARE) PhD program at Berkeley. When I saw the letter, I had a strong sense that I would end up there. Eithan spoke enthusiastically about the program, emphasizing that students in agricultural economics could take rigorous core economics courses while benefiting from a close-knit department, and that Berkeley encouraged intellectual mobility across disciplines. At the time, I was debating between computer science and economics, and Berkeley’s openness to such transitions was decisive. I also learned that Berkeley had recently been ranked the top graduate university by the National Research Council. From the broader media, I absorbed the prevailing sentiment that California was shaping the future. I applied to Berkeley ARE, was accepted, and that decision changed my life.

Life as a Student

I liked Berkeley from the day of my arrival on July 2, 1973. The weather, natural beauty, friendliness of people, and inexpensive food all contributed to its appeal. I lived in a small room at International House (with a view of the stadium rather than the Bay), made close friends, and gained weight very quickly. Initially, I worried about whether I could succeed academically: classes were in English, and few people understood what I jokingly called “Zilbonics.” After three weeks, I realized that I would manage, which allowed me to enjoy basketball games and even begin dating.

ARE students formed a close community, and information about classes, lectures, and campus life circulated efficiently. My preparation in Israel served me well, and I found the coursework to be of very high quality. Econometrics courses taught by Rothenberg especially influenced me; a McFadden course that required us to read 10 papers intensively; and mathematical economics taught by Mas-Colell and Debreu. Two instructors stood out in particular: David Blackwell, who taught game theory in the Statistics Department, and George Kuznets, who taught in our department. Both presented complex mathematical models with remarkable clarity and, most importantly, with strong motivation and intuition.

Much of my learning occurred outside formal coursework through daily interactions with fellow students and faculty in the coffee room. Andy Schmitz constantly challenged us with new ideas for papers. Most went nowhere, but one eventually led to a paper published in the American Economic Review. Gershon Feder introduced me to the economics of technology adoption, while Richard Norgaard sparked my interest in environmental issues. These informal interactions shaped my collaborative research style and deepened my appreciation for interdisciplinary thinking.

Early Research and Professional Formation

I was hired as a research assistant to work with Eithan Hochman and George Goldman on reducing groundwater contamination from animal waste. The topic aligned perfectly with my interests, and my prior experience as a computer systems analyst proved extremely useful. We traveled throughout Southern California to interview farmers, and I learned firsthand about heterogeneity in farm size and landholdings, the prevalence of fixed-proportion technologies, and the role of credit constraints. Using these insights and newly assembled data, I developed a model comparing the effects of alternative animal waste regulations on farm profits and social welfare. Hochman pointed out its similarity to the “putty-clay” models then popular in the literature, which helped position the work theoretically. Several publications emerged from this project and played a key role in securing interviews for a Berkeley faculty position.

Working with Eithan Hochman and Richard Just taught me another crucial lesson: persistence. Journal rejection is part of academic life, and reviewers can be harsh. Rather than becoming discouraged, I learned to absorb criticism, improve the work, and submit again. I also discovered that research could be delightful. Richard and I spent many days sailing while writing papers, and together with Eithan, we combined work with travel in Israel and Hawaii. These experiences convinced me that academia was the right career for me.

Forty-Six Years of Teaching and Research

In 1979, I was hired to teach Agricultural Policy, a course that had not been offered at Berkeley during my student years. I needed to learn the subject quickly. I was also assigned to teach Economics of Food and Nutrition. Fortunately, Gordon Rausser and my teaching assistant, Claudia Parliament, provided excellent notes that I built on, allowing me to learn the material while teaching it.

Developing a graduate course proved more challenging. I needed to catch up quickly. Working with my assistant Jeff LaFrance and colleagues Richard Just, Gordon Rausser, and Gershon Feder, I gained expertise in consumer theory, risk, technology adoption, and U.S. agricultural policy. Over the years, my lecture notes have evolved and are now published. I came to realize that developing exciting graduate courses was essential for attracting talented students and building research partnerships—partnerships that became central to my career.

After my first sabbatical in 1986, I shifted to teaching Environmental and Resource Economics, which I taught for approximately thirty-five years. Student interest grew steadily, as did my effectiveness as an instructor. Enrollment increased from about 35 students to nearly 300, eventually requiring the course to be split into separate Environmental Economics and Resource Economics offerings, both of which continue to thrive. I co-authored a book based on this material. Since 2019, I have taught a course on the Economics of Innovation and Supply Chains and expect to develop it into another book.

The Evolution of My Research

My research career has been driven by problems rather than allegiance to a single field. My early work focused on animal waste and pollution regulation. Collaboration with Richard Just and Gershon Feder drew me into technology adoption, a topic I have pursued for four decades. That work naturally extended to marketing, innovation, and supply chains. Consulting projects on drip irrigation in California deepened my understanding of water systems and generated influential research in water economics. Advisory work with the EPA on pesticide regulation led to collaborations with Erik Lichtenberg and others on pesticide productivity and health effects. These methodological tools later proved valuable in my research on biotechnology and genetic engineering, which became a significant focus after 2000.

These studies share several common features: the explicit integration of scientific concepts into economic models, recognition of heterogeneity among economic agents, and an emphasis on political economy. For example, we show that input-use efficiency—such as the ratio of water applied to water actually used by the crop—and biophysical heterogeneity (including variation in weather and soil conditions) interact with economic variables to determine where and when technologies such as drip irrigation, integrated pest management, and GMOs are adopted, as well as the distribution of their gains and costs. This knowledge is essential for designing effective policies and pricing mechanisms.Another example comes from my work on how new technologies spread over time.
Traditional diffusion models focus on imitation—people adopt because others do. My approach treats adoption as a step-by-step decision process, shaped by differences among individuals. People move from awareness (where education, extension, advertising, and imitation all matter) to assessment (where they weigh benefits, costs, and both actual and perceived risks), and then to post-adoption evaluation, where experience feeds back into future decisions. Diffusion also changes as technologies improve, costs fall, user networks emerge, and government policies influence incentives and risks.

I have used this framework to study the adoption of Green Revolution technologies, drip irrigation in California, computers on farms, and GMOs. It highlights the value of marketing and policy tools—such as trials, demonstrations, and money-back guarantees—in reducing uncertainty and speeding adoption. This is applied theory in action: using economic models and data to explain past diffusion, predict future adoption, and assess alternative policies.

I also analyzed how risk—both perceived and actual, including financial and health risks—affects producers’ and consumers’ choices. Our findings indicate that asymmetric political power among interest groups and information failures play a central role in shaping policy outcomes. These forces influence the timing and scope of water trading, the mechanisms used to pay for environmental amenities, and, in some cases, lead to the banning or excessive regulation of biotechnologies in many jurisdictions.

Work in biotechnology led me to biofuels and, ultimately, to the concept of the circular bioeconomy—economic systems that use agriculture, forestry, and fisheries to produce energy, chemicals, pharmaceuticals, sequester carbon, and provide environmental services. The circular bioeconomy is essential for transitioning away from non-renewable resources and has become a central focus of my current research.

The Crucial Role of Service

When I was a young professor, I assumed that my primary responsibilities were to publish and teach. Over time, I realized that if everyone adopted this narrow view, the university would not function. Gordon Rausser emphasized that excellence requires collective action and public service from all faculty. I served as Graduate Program Chair from 1981 to 1994. The committee and I personally contacted prospective students, tailored outreach to individual needs, and sustained large, high-quality entering cohorts. This recruitment model remains largely in place today.

I later served as department chair from 1994 to 2000, during a period of significant budget cuts. Despite these constraints, we secured two new faculty positions and two new extension positions. By pooling resources and working collaboratively, we modernized departmental operations, including a transition from centralized word processing to decentralized personal computing, with administrative support better aligned with faculty needs.

A unique feature of ARE departments in California is their responsibility to address the state’s broader agricultural and natural resource challenges. From 1995–2000 and again from 2003–2007, I served as Director of the Giannini Foundation, jointly managed by the ARE departments at Berkeley and Davis. During my tenure, I organized two statewide conferences on California agriculture each year and ensured that Foundation funds supported projects with clear statewide benefits. I also elected to hold a 15 percent extension appointment. My extension activities included organizing conferences on the bioeconomy and related topics. My most challenging service assignment was serving on Berkeley’s Budget Committee from 2006 to 2009, which made recommendations to the Chancellor on promotions and faculty allocations across departments. Working approximately fifteen hours per week with colleagues across campus provided firsthand insight into the importance of peer-review mechanisms in sustaining excellence at Berkeley despite persistent resource constraints.

Leadership Programs and Lifelong Learning

One of my most rewarding service activities was helping to establish the Beahrs Environmental Leadership Program (ELP). Since 2000, the program has brought mid-career environmental leaders from around the world to Berkeley for intensive training in leadership, policy, and management. With more than 800 alums, the program has created a global network that continues to collaborate with Berkeley faculty.

The success of ELP led to the creation of the Master of Development Practice (MDP) at Berkeley, a two-year professional program combining rigorous coursework with extensive field experience. Graduates have gone on to fulfilling careers in public agencies, NGOs, private firms, and entrepreneurial ventures.

Knowledge is built by communities of scholars. I have also been active in the Agricultural and Applied Economics Association (AAEA), serving on its board (2002–2004; 2018–2020) and as its president in 2019. I initiated the establishment of the AAEA Galbraith Medal, awarded to Nobel Prize recipients and prominent public intellectuals who lecture at AAEA Annual Meetings. I also encouraged the creation of appreciation funds to strengthen the Association’s long-term financial position. During my service, the board enhanced support for agricultural economics research and employment opportunities for AAEA members. We also succeeded in having agricultural economics recognized as a distinct discipline in the National Research Council’s departmental rankings, where Berkeley ARE ranked very highly.

I have been one of three founders of the International Consortium of Applied Bioeconomy Research (ICABR), which celebrates its 30th anniversary this year. ICABR provided a vehicle for establishing much of the research agenda of the emerging field and for building a global community of scholars working on bioeconomy policy and economics. Journals and books are the lifelines in academia. I have published in a few, but I’ve been closely associated with three of them. I have served as co-editor of ARE Update since 2001. It is a Giannini Foundation publication, founded by Richard Sexton, aimed at a general audience. With its broad readership, ARE Update has proven to be an effective vehicle for improving economic literacy among policymakers, practitioners, and the public. I joined Gordon Rausser in establishing the Annual Review of Resource Economics in 2009 and have served as co-editor since 2016. It became a highly cited resource in Agricultural, Environmental, and Development economics, synthesizing research findings and pointing to new, promising paths. Since 1991, I’ve been a co-editor of Natural Resource Management and Policy, a series of 63 books tracing the evolution of research in environmental and resource economics. 

Lessons for ARE and Berkeley

Over time, I have become an ARE lifer and view the department and Berkeley as my intellectual home. Agricultural and applied economics is closely related to economics but distinct in its problem-driven, interdisciplinary orientation. The Berkeley department is strongest when it embraces this perspective and engages deeply with other disciplines. While publication in top economics journals is essential, contributions to field journals and interdisciplinary outlets such as Science and Nature can have equal or greater impact.

The administrative and technical support within the department was especially crucial to my work. I am grateful to Amor Nolan, Angie Erickson, and the many student assistants whose careful typing and editing of my manuscripts made me look good.

As I transition to POG status, I intend to continue contributing to research, education, and outreach. I have always enjoyed the search for better answers and the camaraderie that comes with it, and I look forward to continuing that journey at Berkeley.