Hostname: page-component-7479d7b7d-wxhwt Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-13T19:01:39.003Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Reflections on Relevance of Professional Journals

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  28 April 2015

Lindon J. Robison  and
Dale Colyer
Lindon J. Robison
Affiliation:
Michigan State University and West Virginia University
Dale Colyer
Affiliation:
Michigan State University and West Virginia University
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

It appears the major private benefit from peer reviewed journals such as the Review of Agricultural Economics (RAE) is certification. To maintain public support for our journals, increased efforts are needed to demonstrate the social benefits from peer reviewed publications. Research cost considerations have led agricultural economists to emphasize applied disciplinary work using secondary data and to ignore the important work of careful data collection and reporting. Moreover, pressures to publish have led to more isolated research efforts ignoring other disciplines. Recommendations to improve the relevance of journal publications include more active efforts by journal editors to make applied journals such as RAE more accessible to the public.

Keywords

certificationconfirmation studiesprivate goodspublic goodsrelevance
Type
Invited Papers and Discussions
Information
Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics , Volume 26 , Issue 1 , July 1994 , pp. 19 - 34
Copyright
Copyright © Southern Agricultural Economics Association 1994

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Armbruster, W.J. “The Future of Land Grant Universities and Agricultural Economists.” RAE 15(1993):591–602.Google Scholar
Armbruster, W.J. “Serving AAEA Membership.” AAEA Newsletter, Vol. 12, No. 2, March/April, 1991.Google Scholar
Ayer, H.W. and Schuh, G.E.. “Social Rates of Return and Other Aspects of Agricultural Research: The Case of Cotton Research in Sao Paulo, Brazil.” AJAE 54(1972):557–69.Google Scholar
Barry, P.J. “Publishing in Professional Journals.” The Journal of Agricultural Economics Research 41(1989):2–3.Google Scholar
Bonnen, J.T. “A Century of Science in Agriculture: Lessons for Science Policy.” AJAE 68(1986): 1065–81.Google Scholar
Broder, J.M. and Ziemer, R.F.. “Determinants of Agricultural Economics Faculty Salaries.” AJAE 64(1982):301–3.Google Scholar
Bromley, D.W. “Vested Interests, Organizational Inertia, and Market Shares: A Commentary on Academic Obsolescence.” Choices 3(1992):58–9.Google Scholar
Castle, E.N. “On the Communications Gap in Agricultural Economics.” AJAE 75(1993):84–91.Google Scholar
Collander, D. “Economists Don't Teach Students What They Need to Know.” The Chronicle of Higher Education, November 13, 1991.Google Scholar
Debertin, D.L. and Pagoulatos, A.. “Research in Agricultural Economics, 1919-1990: Seventy-two Years of Change.” RAE 14(1992): 1–22.Google Scholar
Dewald, W.G., Thursby, J.G., and Anderson, R.G.. “Replication in Empirical Economics: The Journal of Money, Credit and Banking Project.” AER 76(1986):587–603.Google Scholar
Dewald, W.G. “Replication in Empirical Economics: The Journal of Money, Credit and Banking Project: Reply.” AER 78(1988): 1162–63.Google Scholar
Johnson, G.L.Research Methodology for Economists. Chapter 2. New York: Macmillan Co., 1986.Google Scholar
Just, R.E. and Rausser, G.C.. “An Assessment of the Agricultural Economics Profession.” AJAE 71(1989): 1177–90.Google Scholar
Just, R.E. “The Governance Structure of Agricultural Science and Agricultural Economics: A Call to Arms.” AJAE 75(1993):69–83.Google Scholar
Kane, E.J. “Why Journal Editors Should Encourage the Replication of Applied Econometric Research.” Quarterly Journal of Business and Economics 23(1984):3–8.Google Scholar
Kuznets, G.M. “Theory and Quantitative Analysis.” JFE 45(1963): 1393–1400.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lacy, W.B. and Busch, L.. “Guardians of Science: Journals and Journal Editors in Agricultural Sciences.” Rural Sociology 47(1982):429–48.Google Scholar
Leontief, W. “Can Economics be Reconstructed as an Empirical Science?” AJAE 75(1993):2–5.Google Scholar
Leontief, W. “Theoretical Assumptions and Nonobserved Facts.” AER 61(1971): 1–7.Google Scholar
Limerick, P.N. “Dancing With Professors: The Trouble with Academic Prose.” The New York Times Book Review, October 31, 1993.Google Scholar
McClosky, D.N.The Rhetoric of Economics. Madison: University of Wisconsin Press, 1985.Google Scholar
Merrick, J.J. Jr. “Replication in Empirical Economics: The Journal of Money, Credit and Banking Project: Comment.” AER 78(1988):1160–61.Google Scholar
Paris, Q., Caputo, M.R., and Holloway, G.J.. “Keeping the Dream of Rigorous Hypothesis Testing Alive.” AJAE 75(1993):25–40.Google Scholar
Peters, D.P. and Ceci, S.J.. “A Manuscript Masquerade: How Well Does the Review Process Work?” The Sciences 20(1980): 16–19.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pope, R.D., Kramer, R.A., Green, R.D., and Gardner, B.D.. “An Evaluation of Econometric Models of U.S. Farmlan. Prices.” WJAE 4(1979): 107–19.Google Scholar
Tomek, W.G. “Confirmation and Replication in Empirical Econometrics: A Step Toward Improved Scholarship.” AJAE 75(1993):6–14.Google Scholar
‘Towers of Babble.” The Economist, December 25th-January 7th, 1994, pp. 72–74.Google Scholar
VanTassell, L.S., McLemore, D.L., and Roberts, R.K.. “Expectations and Perceptions of the Peer Review Process: A Study of Four Agricultural Economics Journals.” RAE 14(1992):241–54.Google Scholar
Wible, J.R. “Maximization, Replication, and the Economic Rationality of Positive Economic Sciences.” RAE 3(April 1991): 164–86.Google Scholar