Balancing International Public Goods And Accountability

The International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI) has undertaken research programs on agricultural STI policy since 1995. This study assesses the impact of this body of research outputs and support services in terms of three complementary analyses: (1) an evaluation of the potential impact of the complete body of research using implicit or explicit impact pathways, (2) two case studies that assess the actual impact of particular research outputs, and (3) a more traditional bibliometric analysis. Movement along the impact pathway, in turn, requires different types of research products—evolving from problem framing to methodology development, then to case studies, and finally to context-specific policy recommendations—all within the logical stages of the impact pathway. How far IFPRI operates along this impact pathway produces a basic tension between the CGIAR’s mandate to produce international public goods (IPGs) and the increasing focus on accountability through impact in the use of international public funds.

As the two case studies suggest, STI impact is highly context-specific, and must often adapt to a changing decision-making milieu. Partner engagement is a critical piece in moving policy research to outcomes, as is reflected in IFPRI’s most recent strategy and increased deployment of personnel to country programs. However, local deployment for impact comes at the expense of critical mass at headquarters and the ability to engage in emerging trends in scientific discovery. And, as the review highlights, such critical mass can only be deployed over a limited number of research themes. As the IFPRI STI team explores the next strategic focus for its research, it faces the difficult question of how to balance the increasing emphasis on accountability, and therefore impact, with the ability of IFPRI to define new research areas and generate IPGs in this critical policy area.

This publication addresses factors that promote or inhibit successful provision of the four key international public goods: financial stability, international trade regime, international diffusion of technological knowledge and global environment. Without these goods, developing countries are unable to compete, prosper or attract capital from abroad. The need for public goods provision is also recognized by the Millennium Development Goals, internationally agreed goals and targets for knowledge, health, governance and environmental public goods. The Report addresses the nature of required policies and institutions using the modern principles of collective action.

PIM had a productive final year centered on synthesizing findings while continuing to respond to demand on the impacts of COVID-19 and preparing the transition to the new CGIAR portfolio. PIM findings and engagement contributed to Myanmar’s response to COVID-19, South Africa’s policies on resilience to climate change, Tunisia's policies for pastoral development, a reform of Nigeria’s national agricultural research system, Ghana’s fish seed and farm certification system, gender strategies for three agricultural value chains in Honduras, and genome editing guidelines for the agricultural sector in four African countries. PIM research informed policy documents of FAO, IFAD, One CGIAR, the UK Government, the World Bank and the World Food Programme. PIM tools enabled more equitable co-management of 76 protected areas in Peru and informed World Bank social protection projects. Books on food security in Bangladesh and Malawi, trade in Latin America, African agricultural value chains and gender were published. 42 PIM synthesis briefs and notes were issued, summarizing research results in key thematic areas. PIM contributed 181 journal articles, 8 journal issues (on demand driven seed systems, China’s response to COVID-19, agriculture and food security in China under COVID-19, food loss and waste, landscape restoration, multistakeholder fora in forestry and two issues on gender), 15 book chapters and about 500 non-peer-reviewed outputs. 16 PIM webinars were organized. PIM’s contributions to the United Nations Food Systems Summit covered agricultural extension, food system innovations and digital technologies, the future of small farms, the science-policy interface, the cost of ending hunger by 2030, food waste and loss, management of the commons and gender. Building on past PIM investments in economywide modeling tools and social accounting matrices, PIM teams continued to assess the impacts of COVID-19 and policy responses at country level. Lessons learned from PIM country-level analyses on COVID-19’s impacts on food systems, poverty and diets are summarized in a chapter of the IFPRI 2022 book “COVID19 and global food security: Two years later”. A paper in partnership with the CGIAR COVID19 Hub reviewed the literature on agri-food value chains for evidence of fractures and resilience in response to the pandemic. The results of coordinated studies on the impacts of COVID-19 on value chains in different countries were published. Several cross-CGIAR outputs initiated by PIM speak to the fulfillment of PIM’s convening role as an integrating program: the CGIAR Foresight Report and CGIAR foresight website; several outputs produced through the CGIAR Community of Excellence on Seed Systems Development, and the CGIAR book “Advancing gender equality through agricultural and environmental research: Past, present, and future” are examples. Other examples of PIM global public goods produced in 2021 are 27 innovations at various stages of uptake, a cross-cutting effort to distill PIM lessons on migration; new or updated social accounting matrices for 25 countries; and lessons and tools on stakeholder platforms for natural resource governance. Independent reviews assessed the effectiveness of PIM’s partnerships and the use by partners of PIM’s work on economywide modelling, agricultural insurance, tenure and governance, and the Ag-Incentives database.

In 2020, PIM findings contributed to seed policies in Nepal and Uganda, Malawi’s extension strategy and approval of insect-resistant cotton, a nationwide program aimed at improving the effectiveness of public service delivery in Uganda, social protection programs in Egypt, and school gardens for better nutrition in Papua New Guinea. At the global level, PIM research was used to shape strategic decisions of organizations such as the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, GIZ, the Inter-American Development Bank, the UK Government's Foreign, Commonwealth & Development Office, the World Bank and the World Health Organization. PIM tools were incorporated in universities’ curricula in India and South Africa. Examples of PIM innovations scaled up by partners in 2020 are private sector seed marketing in Ethiopia, picture-based insurance in Ethiopia, India and Kenya, and tools for inclusive governance of natural resources in India and Peru.

IFPRI’s Poverty, Health, and Nutrition Division (PHND) and the CGIAR Research Program on Agriculture for Nutrition and Health (A4NH) have conducted research since 2003 on the critical links between nutrition, health, and agriculture. This evaluation considers the impact of the work carried out through 2016, looking at the research strategy, engagement, capacity building, and impact on programs and policies and global dialogue. Findings suggest that the Diet Quality and Health of the Poor program has been successful in developing and sharing valuable research, knowledge, and data, and has brought new issues and approaches to partners and stakeholders. Through a range of projects, the program has effectively engaged with stakeholders, partners, and governments to support capacity enhancement and to help shape national interventions to improve nutrition.