IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/agisys/v172y2019icp1-15.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Food and agricultural innovation pathways for prosperity

Author

Listed:
  • Tomich, Thomas P.
  • Lidder, Preetmoninder
  • Coley, Mariah
  • Gollin, Douglas
  • Meinzen-Dick, Ruth
  • Webb, Patrick
  • Carberry, Peter

Abstract

This introduction to the special issue deploys a framework, inspired by realist synthesis and introduced in Section 1, that aims to untangle the contexts, mechanisms, and outcomes associated with investments that link poverty reduction and rural prosperity within a broad agri-food systems perspective. Section 2 considers changes in contexts: Where are agricultural research investments most likely to be an engine of poverty reduction? Over the past 25 years, there have been profound changes in the development context of most countries, necessitating an update on strategic insights for research investment priorities relevant for the economic, political, social, environmental, and structural realities of the early 21st Century. Section 2 briefly surveys changes in these structural aspects of poverty and development processes in low-income countries, with particular attention to new drivers (e.g., urbanization, climate change) that will be of increasing salience in the coming decades. In Section 3, we turn to mechanisms: What are the plausible impact pathways and what evidence exists to test their plausibility? Poor farmers in the developing world are often the stated focus of public sector agricultural research. However, farmers are not the only potential beneficiaries of agricultural research; rural landless laborers, stakeholders along food value chains, and the urban poor can also be major beneficiaries of such research. Thus, there are multiple, interacting pathways through which agricultural research can contribute to reductions in poverty and associated livelihood vulnerabilities. This paper introduces an ex ante set of 18 plausible impact pathways from agricultural research to rural prosperity outcomes, employing bibliometric methods to assess the evidence underpinning causal links. In Section 4, we revisit the concept of desired impacts: When we seek poverty reduction, what does that mean and what measures are needed to demonstrate impact? The papers in this special issue are intended to yield insights to inform improvements in agricultural research that seeks to reduce poverty. History indicates that equity of distribution of gains matters hugely, and thus the questions of “who wins?” and “who loses?” must be addressed. Moreover, our understanding(s) of “poverty” and the intended outcomes of development investments have become much richer over the past 25 years, incorporating more nuance regarding gender, community differences, and fundamental reconsideration of the meaning of poverty and prosperity that are not captured by simple head count income or even living standard measures.

Suggested Citation

  • Tomich, Thomas P. & Lidder, Preetmoninder & Coley, Mariah & Gollin, Douglas & Meinzen-Dick, Ruth & Webb, Patrick & Carberry, Peter, 2019. "Food and agricultural innovation pathways for prosperity," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 172(C), pages 1-15.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:agisys:v:172:y:2019:i:c:p:1-15
    DOI: 10.1016/j.agsy.2018.01.002
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0308521X17305383
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Olinto, Pedro & Beegle, Kathleen & Sobrado, Carlos & Uematsu, Hiroki, 2013. "The State of the Poor: Where Are The Poor, Where Is Extreme Poverty Harder to End, and What Is the Current Profile of the World’s Poor?," World Bank - Economic Premise, The World Bank, issue 125, pages 1-8, October.
    2. Christiaensen, Luc & Demery, Lionel & Kuhl, Jesper, 2011. "The (evolving) role of agriculture in poverty reduction--An empirical perspective," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 96(2), pages 239-254, November.
    3. Gollin, Douglas & Hansen, Casper Worm & Wingender, Asger, 2016. "Two Blades of Grass: The Impact of the Green Revolution," CEPR Discussion Papers 11611, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    4. Alkire, Sabina & Foster, James, 2011. "Counting and multidimensional poverty measurement," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 95(7), pages 476-487.
    5. Hulme, David & Shepherd, Andrew, 2003. "Conceptualizing Chronic Poverty," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 31(3), pages 403-423, March.
    6. Douglas Gollin & Remi Jedwab & Dietrich Vollrath, 2016. "Urbanization with and without industrialization," Journal of Economic Growth, Springer, vol. 21(1), pages 35-70, March.
    7. Hoddinott, John F., 2014. "Looking at development through a resilience lens:," IFPRI book chapters,in: Fan, Shenggen & Pandya-Lorch, Rajul & Yosef, Sivan (ed.), 2013 Global Food Policy Report, chapter 3 International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI).
    8. Meinzen-Dick, Ruth Suseela & Quisumbing, Agnes R. & Doss, Cheryl R. & Theis, Sophie, 2017. "Women’s land rights as a pathway to poverty reduction: A framework and review of available evidence," IFPRI discussion papers 1663, International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI).
    9. Anirudh Krishna, 2010. "Who became poor, who escaped poverty, and why? Developing and using a retrospective methodology in five countries," Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 29(2), pages 351-372.
    10. repec:oup:qjecon:v:129:y:2014:i:2:p:939-993. is not listed on IDEAS
    11. Zhou, Yuan & Staatz, John, 2016. "Projected demand and supply for various foods in West Africa: Implications for investments and food policy," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 61(C), pages 198-212.
    12. Barrett, Christopher B. & Swallow, Brent M., 2006. "Fractal poverty traps," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 34(1), pages 1-15, January.
    13. repec:oup:wbrobs:v:32:y:2017:i:1:p:107-125. is not listed on IDEAS
    14. Barrett, Christopher B. & Headey, Derek D., 2014. "A proposal for measuring resilience in a risky world:," IFPRI book chapters,in: Fan, Shenggen & Pandya-Lorch, Rajul & Yosef, Sivan (ed.), 2013 Global Food Policy Report, chapter 20 International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI).
    15. Jayne, T.S. & Chamberlin, Jordan & Headey, Derek D., 2014. "Land pressures, the evolution of farming systems, and development strategies in Africa: A synthesis," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(C), pages 1-17.
    16. Strauss, John & Thomas, Duncan, 1995. "Human resources: Empirical modeling of household and family decisions," Handbook of Development Economics,in: Hollis Chenery & T.N. Srinivasan (ed.), Handbook of Development Economics, edition 1, volume 3, chapter 34, pages 1883-2023 Elsevier.
    17. International Food Policy Research Institute, 2015. "2014–2015 Global Food Policy Report," IFPRI books, International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI), number 978-0-89629-575-9.
    18. Schultz, Theodore W, 1975. "The Value of the Ability to Deal with Disequilibria," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 13(3), pages 827-846, September.
    19. repec:anr:reveco:v:9:y:2017:p:439-459 is not listed on IDEAS
    20. Grant M. Scobie & Rafael Posada T., 1978. "The Impact of Technical Change on Income Distribution: The Case of Rice in Colombia," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 60(1), pages 85-92.
    21. Douglas Gollin & David Lagakos & Michael E. Waugh, 2014. "The Agricultural Productivity Gap," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 129(2), pages 939-993.
    22. Springer-Heinze, Andreas & Hartwich, Frank & Henderson, J. Simon & Horton, Douglas & Minde, Isaac, 2003. "Impact pathway analysis: an approach to strengthening the impact orientation of agricultural research," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 78(2), pages 267-285, November.
    23. Michael Mastrandrea & Katharine Mach & Gian-Kasper Plattner & Ottmar Edenhofer & Thomas Stocker & Christopher Field & Kristie Ebi & Patrick Matschoss, 2011. "The IPCC AR5 guidance note on consistent treatment of uncertainties: a common approach across the working groups," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 108(4), pages 675-691, October.
    24. Peter Timmer, C., 1988. "The agricultural transformation," Handbook of Development Economics,in: Hollis Chenery & T.N. Srinivasan (ed.), Handbook of Development Economics, edition 1, volume 1, chapter 8, pages 275-331 Elsevier.
    25. Renkow, Mitch & Byerlee, Derek, 2010. "The impacts of CGIAR research: A review of recent evidence," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(5), pages 391-402, October.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:agisys:v:172:y:2019:i:c:p:1-15. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Dana Niculescu). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/agsy .

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.