Using long-term outlooks to highlight constraints, prioritize investments and evaluate impacts

1. Using long-term outlooks to highlight constraints, prioritize investments and evaluate impacts Siwa Msangi Environment and Production Technology Division, IFPRI Meeting on “Thinking Forward: Assessments, Projections & Foresights” 26 January 2010, CIRAD Headquarters, Paris

2. During the course of this presentation…. • We hope to: • Motivate our approach to answering questions of policy impact and investment • Summarize some illustrative scenario results • Show the use of forward-looking analysis in assessing programmatic priorities for new CG • Offer concluding thoughts Page 2 Page 2

3. Key questions to answer • How much harder does agriculture and its supporting systems have to work to meet the future challenges of food needs, bioenergy and climate change? • What are the sources of growth and investment that will be needed to meet these challenges?

4. Summary of research approach • Evaluate key drivers of change (socio-economic, environmental) along a ‘baseline’ of current policies and trends – assess the needs for food/feed/fuel along this path • Introduce alternative paths for environmental drivers consistent with plausible trajectories of climate change – across a variety of modeled climate outcomes • Assess the impacts on agricultural production in various regions, given current technologies • Infer the regions needing urgent interventions and key activities/crops to target – with implied investments

5. Relevant debates and key issues • Food-vs-fuel tradeoffs • Does biofuels ‘crowd out’ land needed for food production or can it actually ‘crowd in’ investments that can make a difference for the whole sector? • Question of ‘indirect impacts’ of biofuels • The changes that growth of biofuels in US/EU induce in the RoW – mostly in terms of land use • Some concern about food security impacts too • What are the priority areas that the new CG should address itself to? What are the ‘best bets’ for R&D that should be captured in the new mega-programs

6. IMPACT-driven projections for agriculture Page 6

7. Additional yield growth in cereals to offset malnutrition impacts of US biofuels target Global Cereal Yield Growth Additional (annual average) yield growth in cereals: 1% in developing world 0.5% in developed world Malnourished children (0-5) In other words…. Going from: 1.3%  1.8% Avg annual yield growth, globally Page 7

8. Alternative climate outcomes CSIRO NCAR cooler warmer CSIRO NCAR drier wetter Page 8

9. Impact of climate change on yields Note: SA= South Asia; EAP = East Asia and Pacific; EE/CA= Eastern Europe and Central Asia; LAC= Latin America and Caribbean; MENA= Middle East and North Africa; SSA=Sub-Saharan Africa

10. Impacts on child malnutrition Millions of children (age 0 to 5) Note: SA= South Asia; EAP = East Asia and Pacific; EE/CA= Eastern Europe and Central Asia; LAC= Latin America and Caribbean; MENA= Middle East and North Africa; SSA=Sub-Saharan Africa

11. Policy scenarios for SRF of new CGIAR Consider a layering of improvements over time • Consider reductions in marketing margins (up to 30%) • Give improvements in natural resource mgmt by: • Changes in basin efficiency (for irrigated systems) • Improvements in effective rainfall (for rainfed systems) • Increases in ag research – in terms of higher crop yield and animal numbers growth – with enhanced efficiency • Increases in irrigated area (at expense of rainfed growth) • Combine these into an overall comprehensive policy scenario – and allow for spillovers to other regions too SRF = Strategy & Results Framework Page 11

12. Policy scenario definitions for SRF Page 12

13. Policy scenario definitions for SRF Page 13

14. Yield impacts from CC under investments Note: SA= South Asia; EAP = East Asia and Pacific; EE/CA= Eastern Europe and Central Asia; LAC= Latin America and Caribbean; MENA= Middle East and North Africa; SSA=Sub-Saharan Africa

15. Impacts on child malnutrition Note: SA= South Asia; EAP = East Asia and Pacific; EE/CA= Eastern Europe and Central Asia; LAC= Latin America and Caribbean; MENA= Middle East and North Africa; SSA=Sub-Saharan Africa Page 15

16. Building towards a strategy Page 16

17. No single model can build a strategy • Strategy team for CG reform used 3 system-level results criteria as a starting point • Greatest impacts can be realized by integrating productivity-enhancing R&D, NRM and institutional & policy change [ IMPACT results support this] • Directing productivity-focused R&D, NRM & policy to sustainably reduce poverty/hunger most quickly for the most people • Recognize dominance of regions by certain commodities to make research choices (dominant crops and foods in diets, dietary diversity problems) Page 17 Page 17

18. Choosing the ‘Mega Programs’ • The MPs were chosen with a dual focus in mind: • Identify research on ag productivity, sustainability & policy that delivers specific outcomes in the form of IPGs & which contribute to 3 system-level outcomes • Focus research in ag systems/regions/domains where research interventions could achieve the greatest impact on hunger & poverty • This was done with a combination of model-based evaluation and spatially-explicit socio-economic and biophysical mapping products – and consultation Page 18 Page 18

19. Sub-national poverty ca. 2005 ($1.25/day) Prevalence Number Source: Stan Wood et al. (IFPRI) 2009.

21. Conclusions Page 24

22. Forward-looking analysis for the CGIAR • During a period of re-evaluation, change and programmatic re-prioritization, the CGIAR is in need of tools to evaluate options and target investment & efforts • Not all scientists within the CGIAR are comfortable with forward-looking assessment/foresight/projections due to the inherent uncertainties in future outcomes • Scenario-based approaches are foreign to some • The utility of equilibrium, economic models is not shared by all, and frequently misunderstood (‘black boxes’) • Yet the complexity of socio-economic & environmental drivers affecting ag needs a structured approach Page 25 Page 25

23. Weaknesses of previous methods • A common approach that was used to evaluate the futures for specific ag commodities (in terms of area, prodn, consn or yield) was straightline projections based on historical trends • Single-commodity models, that could drill down into the details on varieties, prodn systems & policies -- lack key links to other (competing) ag commodities • Most agronomists would prefer to use detailed models of production systems that represent the realities of farming practices at the field level – but these lack price response (tech change/innovation) Page 26 Page 26

24. Analytical challenges to address • Equilibrium models tend to remain too rigid in the face of radical shocks that are outside the range of estimated parameters – evaluating global change may require also looking at non-equilibrium situations • Price formation is at the heart of economic market models, but can only capture situations where market prices are relevant. Optimization models can impute shadow values, but still embody behavioral assumptions that require knowledge of preferences • A number of qualitative aspects of agriculture and behavior which are important cannot be fully quantified Page 27 Page 27

25. Concluding Remarks • The CGIAR needs a framework which has sufficient detail to cover their mandate commodities and eco-regions – and which are key to livelihoods and nutrition • Biophysical linkages to the environment are important to understanding how ag & underlying resource base interact • Linkages to well-being outcomes are essential to evaluating policy options for investment and potential outcomes and impacts

26. Continuing work • Some on-going projects seek to address these challenges and engage with the research/policy community in a different way • HarvestChoice project provides a rich information portal and combines it with analytical work that helps users better identify the constraints to crop productivity (for better targetting of technology) • GlobalFutures project will engage scientists from key CG centers and important stakeholders to explore plausible futures for ag R & D

27. Thank You! Page 30

28. Additional Results Page 31

29. Impact of Climate Change on Yields Note: SA= South Asia; EAP = East Asia and Pacific; EE/CA= Eastern Europe and Central Asia; LAC= Latin America and Caribbean; MENA= Middle East and North Africa; SSA=Sub-Saharan Africa

30. Yield impacts from CC under Investments Note: SA= South Asia; EAP = East Asia and Pacific; EE/CA= Eastern Europe and Central Asia; LAC= Latin America and Caribbean; MENA= Middle East and North Africa; SSA=Sub-Saharan Africa

31. Harvest Choice Page 34

32. HarvestChoice Data Portal Thematic Data Dissemination http://harvestchoice.org/ Page 35

33. The IMPACT model Page 36

34. The Bread & Butter of IMPACT • Much of the past work of IMPACT has centered around providing a forward-looking perspective on what’s needed to meet future food needs, and the implications for key CGIAR mandate commodities • It was designed to look at the medium-to-long term periods, that aren’t covered by short- to medium-term models of USDA, OECD, FAO • Used for projections and not prediction – which implies that you’re more interested in percentage changes from a starting point, or in terms of deviations from a baseline, under alternative scenarios

35. Typical IMPACT-driven scenarios • Looking at the implications of expansion in (irrig/rainfed) area and increased yields on key indicators of: • Production (area/yield), Demand (total/food/ feed/other), Net Trade, Prices (int’l/national) • Per capita calorie availability from all foods • Implied changes in child (under 5) malnutrition • Looking at the implications of the growth in irrigated area and yield, mentioned above, on increased investments in agricultural research and rural roads investments

36. Typical IMPACT-driven scenarios • Looking at the implications of socio-economic growth (income, population) on food/feed demand and other indicators mentioned above • Looking at the implications of higher factor prices (fertilizer, labor) on crop yield – and production • Fairly simple trade liberalization or protection scenarios (with phased changes over time) • Looking at implications of improved socio-economic conditions ( access to clean water, girls secondary schooling, rural roads ) on child malnutrition

37. Policy drivers Domestic Biofuel Prodn Other Demand Demand Socioeconomic Drivers Feed Food Agric. Imports/ exports Trade Equilibrium Balance Trade policy child malnutrition Price Calorie Availability Irrigation investments Area Female education Clean water access Supply Rural Roads Yield [investments] Ag R&D investments Climate change Environmental driver The linkages of relevance to modeling Page 40

38. CGIAR reform & megaprograms Page 41

39. Mega Program portfolio (1) • Agricultural Systems for the Poor and Vulnerable —Research integrating promising crop, animal, fish, and forest combinations with policy and natural resource issues in the domains where high concentrations of the world’s poor live and which offer agricultural potential. • Institutional Innovations, and Markets —Knowledge to inform institutional changes needed for a well-functioning local, national, and global food system that connects small farmers to agricultural value chains through information and communications technologies and facilitates policy and institutional reforms.

40. Mega Program portfolio (2) • Genomics and Global Food Crop Improvements—Genetic improvement of the world’s leading food crops’ productivity and resiliency (i.e. rice, wheat, maize) , building on the success of the CGIAR, including its crucial role in conservation of genetic resources. • Agriculture, Nutrition, and Health —Research to improve nutritional value of food and diets, enhance targeted nutrition and food safety programs, and change agricultural commodities and systems in the medium term to enhance health outcomes.

41. Mega Program portfolio (3) • Water, Soils, and Ecosystems —Harmonization of agricultural productivity and environmental sustainability goals through policies, methods, and technologies to improve water and soil management. • Forests and Trees —Technical, institutional, and policy changes to help conserve forests for humanity and harness forestry and biomass production potentials for sustainable development and the poor. • Climate Change and Agriculture —Diagnosis of the directions and potential impacts of climate change for agriculture and identification of adaptation and mitigation options for agricultural, food, and environmental systems.

42. Cross-Cutting Platforms • Gender: Facilitate strong attention to gender issues and research cooperation on these issues across MPs. Expected results: • increased involvement and income of women in agriculture • reduced disparities in their access to productive resources and control of income • Capacity-building: Strengthen capacity of CGIAR and partners. Expected result: • dynamic knowledge-creating and -sharing system, strong independent NARS, and other research partners sharing knowledge resources and applications