*Originally posted on March 16, 2013
Recently I learned one of my dear colleagues, Bob Evenson from Yale University, passed
away. Bob grew up on a farm in the Minnesota and got his PhD at the University of
Chicago. He became a leading development economist, and taught for more than 30 years
mostly at Yale.
My early impressions, as a student in Israel and in Berkeley, was that Chicago economics
and development were an oxymoron. Chicago economists were supposed to be freemarket,
cold-hearted creatures that only cared about efficiency. Bob was actually the
opposite of this stereotype: he really cared about people, and no matter who you were, he
would listen to you. He cared about solving real problems and was particularly proud of
his contribution to the development of agricultural research in Brazil and the emergence
of EMBRAPA as a leading research institution of the world.
After knowing Bob, I realized that the Chicago economists were not that bad. Actually, the
greatest development economist ever is probably Nobel laureate Theodore Schultz (he
introduced the idea of human capital), who served as Chairman of Chicago Economics;
and the great Vernon Ruttan (who popularized the theory of induced innovation) was a
Chicago graduate, among many others. I have learned that many of the most creative
contributions in development, both economic and policy, came from the Chicago School,
which proves that you need multiple perspectives to address major problems.
Bob produced an incredibly influential paper (with Yoav Kislev) that developed a practical
economic framework to quantitatively understand investments in research. Research is
basically a ‘search’ for outcomes that perform better. The output of research can be
measured by improvement in terms of performance but it is also subject to variability.
Evenson’s work with Kislev developed a way to compute the distribution of research
efforts, and to investigate how extra investment in research can improve outcomes and
reduce uncertainty about them.
This approach justifies allocation of resources towards research. Firms,
and even governments, view research like any other economic activity and
weigh benefit and cost to determine investments in research. Evenson
suggested that if extra social funding of research provides higher returns
than other activities, this means that society under invests in research.
Bob was one of the major contributors in documenting the high rate of
return for different lines of agricultural research, showing that public research in
agricultural, especially in developing countries is extremely valuable, making a case for
increased investment and improved design of public research. His work in the Brazilian
government in agencies like Rockefeller and Gates Foundation was crucial in directing
research towards food production, which has saved lives.
Bob was an excellent scholar but he was also an intellectual leader. He was an intuitive
leader that would recognize new direction for research and worked very hard to make sure
that they will be followed. While he was one of the biggest advocates for public investment
in agricultural research, he recognized that to be effective, public-private partnerships
were important to induce private investment in research.
To induce private investment in agricultural research, it was important to introduce
intellectual property on genetic material. He inspired a lot of researchers on how to design
and manage intellectual property in agriculture to make sure that it is not abused. He also
realized the potential of genetic engineering in agriculture and some of the likely
controversy they may cause and the need for global cooperation for research on this topic.
Together with Vittorio Santaniello he organized a conference in Rome in 1998 on the
economics of biotechnology and biodiversity, which lead to the establishment of the
International Consortium of Agricultural Biotechnology Research that has been meeting
mostly in Ravello, Italy. This has become an international forum to discuss economics and
policy challenges as global society increasingly relies on biological based technology.
I was privileged to collaborate with Bob in this consortium and was amazed at his capacity
to vision new areas of research, to inspire and finance participation from developing
countries, and produce books and other publications that provide a base for sound policy
discussion. While he maintained academic excellence, the Ravello conference was a
meeting of friends and Bob and his wife Judy made everyone feel welcome. It was an
incredible achievement to establish an island of collaboration and reason in the midst of
controversy.
Bob’s departing is a loss to his friends, family and colleagues. He was one of these rare
individuals that made a difference in the lives of people around the world and blazed a
path that many will follow.