1900, came about through the activities of private indi­viduals such as innovative farmers, blacksmiths and estate owners. Accordingly, a large share of the technical ad­vances from this informal system was realized in the form of mechanical innovations rather than biological advances (Hayami and Ruttan, 1971; Evenson, 1983). Agricultural societies provided early support to teaching and research institutions. Both the performance and the funding of ag­ricultural research in the U.S. has since then been shared between private and public interests.
     In most countries in NAE formalized agricultural re­search   organizations  were   established   from  the   1840s onwards. The first experimental stations staffed with pro­fessional scientists were established in the UK, France and Germany, followed soon by most other European countries. By 1875 there were 90 national experimental stations in Europe (Grantham, 1984). In the US, acts of Congress as­sisted the states in establishing land-grant colleges to teach agriculture and applied sciences (in 1862), carry out agri­cultural research, establish the land-grant experiment sta­tions (in 1887 and 1890) and authorize statewide informal education at colleges (in 1914). In contrast to the German model, the US experimental stations were established un­der the direction of a state land-grant college or university. In order to assure the dissemination of the knowledge pro­duced by these investments, the Cooperative Agricultural Extension Service was created in the US as a partnership between federal, state and county governments. In Europe higher education in agriculture was in most cases arranged as an activity of existing universities. In further contrast to the US, distribution of their results to farmers was not a ma­jor focus of the activity of the experimental research stations in Europe. Farmers' institutes, traveling agricultural-college short courses and field demonstration activities were turn-of-the-century precursors to extension.
     The second wave of public commitment to expansion of agricultural R&D in NAE took place in the first half

of the 1900s, based on crucial developments in the basic and applied sciences, e.g., in chemistry, mechanization and genetics. These developments fundamentally changed the roles of private and public actors (organizations and their personnel, etc.) in science. This change coincided with the end of the Second World War, a period when science (and agricultural R&D in particular) was widely considered a po­tential source of major improvements in social welfare. This perception fostered a strong third wave of development of structures for agricultural R&D.
     The governmental responsibility for AKST is divided in many different ways in NAE, but the responsibility is often shared among different ministries. In Russia and the now independent former Soviet states a highly centralized AKST was established. In contrast, in the US decision-making was decentralized and occurred largely at the regional level (Ta­ble 4-3), a situation that has fostered diversity, innovation and local adaptation (Miller et al., 2000). In countries in Western Europe, levels of decentralization vary. Germany is an example where decision making in agricultural research and education also occurs to a great extent at the regional ("Laender") level.
     As outlined above, the higher education, agricultural re­search and extension systems of the US were established in a relatively integrated way. In contrast, in Russia and in the CEE countries which followed the Russian model, AKST or­ganization have been highly divided and research, education and training were not integrated. In Russia, AKST is still divided into science academies that also provide the highest education to universities, research institutes and training sys­tems. The public extension service is still poorly developed. The decentralization and integration of US AKST is consid­ered an important part of the US's success in increasing pro­ductivity of agriculture (Huffman and Evenson, 1993). In a comparative analysis of the development in productivity of agriculture in relation to the organization of AKST and of the development of US public education in relation to the