Science, Agriculture, And The Politics Of Research

by Lawrence Busch, William B Lacy

Although the U.S. agricultural research system is highly esteemed and used as a model for national programs in many developing countries, surprisingly little is known about its operation, which has been publicly funded for nearly a century. This book describes the structure of that system and examines the many factors that influence the choices of research problems by agricultural scientists working within it. The authors show how the research system has evolved through a complex set of negotiations into its present form. They then examine how individuals, organizations, and disciplines influence scientists' decisions about what to study, as well as their perceptions of research goals and beneficiaries. Drawing throughout on a wealth of primary documents, in-depth interviews, a national survey of over 1,400 practicing scientists, a survey of editors of science journals, and government statistical series, Drs. Busch and Lacy conclude by delineating the key issues that scientists, administrators, and policymakers must address as the public agricultural research system prepares to enter its second century.

303 pages, Paperback

First published August 1, 1982

Reviews

[Kittie Norris]

The acknowledgments here read like a quiet tribute to collaborative science. There is no grandstanding, no vague thanks to unnamed colleagues. Instead, we get names, roles, and specific tasks. The authors even thank the Kentucky Agricultural Experiment Station and the Ford Foundation for research funds. That transparency is rare and welcome. The prose is plain, comma heavy in the best way, and entirely free of hyphens. It left me with the impression that Busch and Lacy are the kind of scholars who remember the people behind the data.

[LACEY FARR]

This is a model acknowledgment section because it balances gratitude with honesty. Busch and Lacy admit that it is impossible to thank everyone, yet they still go out of their way to recognize dozens of individuals. The result is a page that feels human and unpretentious. I was struck by the mention of Rosemary Cheek, who typed most of the manuscript, and Janice Taylor, who handled administrative interference. These small nods give the book a warm, behind the scenes quality that is often missing from academic writing.

[Barbara Ervin]

This acknowledgment page offers a refreshingly honest look at how research actually gets done. The authors do not pretend their work was a solitary effort. Instead, they name the many people who coded data, typed manuscripts, and ran computer programs. That kind of gratitude feels genuine, not performative. It reminds us that scholarship is a collective human endeavor, often carried by unseen hands. I especially appreciated the mention of administrative interference, which adds a touch of real world humor to an otherwise formal section.

[Maria Andrews]

Reading this page felt like stepping into a busy research office from decades past. Busch and Lacy thank everyone from the Ford Foundation to the typists who prepared the manuscript. There is no jargon here, just a warm recognition of labor. The detail about a computer tape listing current projects is a small but fascinating window into the technology of the time. This is not a generic thank you list. It is a quiet testament to teamwork, and it made me appreciate the book before I even reached chapter one.

[Dawn Root]

What stands out in this acknowledgment is the sheer specificity. The authors name survey coordinators, data coders, indexers, and even those who helped with administrative details. That level of care suggests they valued every contribution, no matter how small. The tone is humble and grounded, free of academic posturing. It also quietly acknowledges the institutional support that made the research possible. For anyone who has ever worked on a large project, this page will feel deeply familiar and oddly moving.