1. Investment in Agricultural
Research as a Development
Strategy
International Center for Agricultural Research in the Dry Areas
Aden Aw-Hassan
ICARDA
Food Secure Arab World
A Roadmap for Policy and Research
International conference organized by
The International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI) and the United
Nations Economic and Social Commission for Western Asia (UN-ESCWA)
February 6-7, 2012 – UN-ESCWA, Beirut, Lebanon

2. Outline of the talk:
International Center for Agricultural Research in the Dry Areas
1. Examples of research impacts
2. Agricultural total factor productivity growth
3. The food security case of Tunisia
4. Conclusion
2

3. The impacts of wheat crop variety
improvement on poverty reduction
in Syria
International Center for Agricultural Research in the Dry Areas
3

4. Objectives were to determine:
 level of adoption of improved wheat varieties and
International Center for Agricultural Research in the Dry Areas
their economic impacts.
 Impacts of adoption of MV on rural poverty
 Better targeting of wheat crop varieties
4

5. Map of Syria
5
International Center for Agricultural Research in the Dry Areas

6. Methods
Farm survey (1010 households):
 Adoption rates from survey
International Center for Agricultural Research in the Dry Areas
 Poverty indicators of wheat growers estimated
Economic Surplus model:
 Adoption data
 Yield improvements (15% rainfed and 22% irrigated)
 Prices of wheat (USD 250/t) set by government
 For the period of 1985-2007
 Gross annual research benefits for 2007
 Small closed economy (price is set by the state)
 Only producer surplus is estimated
Propensity matching technique:
 To link likely greater adoption of new wheat varieties
6

7. Results (1)
Adoption of soft wheat varieties 2007
International Center for Agricultural Research in the Dry Areas
Varietal use by agro-ecology
Variety Rainfed Irrigated All
Cham6 74 69 71
Cham8 4 20 13
Others 22 11 16
100 100 100
Sample
(n) 175 235 410
7

8. Results (2):
Wheat growers poverty rates, 2007
International Center for Agricultural Research in the Dry Areas
Frequency Percent
Poor 282 27.9
Non-Poor 728 72.1
Total 1010 100.0
8

9. Results (3):
Economic benefits of modern wheat
varieties
International Center for Agricultural Research in the Dry Areas
The estimated annual benefits from improved
modern varieties:
• Durum wheat: USD mill 0.53
• Bread wheat: USD mill 1.65
9

10. Results (4)
Estimated reduction in poverty
International Center for Agricultural Research in the Dry Areas
indicators with MV adoption
Poverty
indicator Durum Bread
Headcount 31% 60%
Depth 28% 65%
Severity 25% 64%
10

11. Concern about adoption
Adoption of modern (first generation) is high Cham 6 and Cham 3
International Center for Agricultural Research in the Dry Areas
100 80%
80 66%
% farmers
60
40 21
9 10 9
20 0.3 0.8 4.5
0
Cham 2 Cham 4 Cham 6 Cham 8 Others Cham 1 Cham 3 Cham 5 Others
Bread wheat Varieties Durum wheat Varieties

12. Implications
Seed multiplication and distribution need
International Center for Agricultural Research in the Dry Areas
to adopt a more flexible business model
of targeting varieties to their appropriate
environments, and to increase the
diversity of varieties available for farmers.
This will have a significant impact on farm income and poverty reduction,
and will reduce the risk of losses due to disease epidemics.
12

13. Other technologies evaluated with
significantly positive impacts
International Center for Agricultural Research in the Dry Areas
Supplemental irrigation (Yigezu et al, 2012)
Alley cropping of shrubs (atriplex and cactus) in
dry lands (shideed et al 2010)
Water harvesting for barley and shrubs (Akroush
et al 2011)
13

14. Supplementary (improved) irrigation
in Syria
International Center for Agricultural Research in the Dry Areas
The total national impact (farm profits plus value
added to the conserved water) of the shift to ISI
at its current adoption level of 22.34% is
estimated in the range of 52 – 691 million SYP
per year.
14

15. Returns to Atriplex adoption in Morocco
Assumptions and computed rates of returns at
Programme area and national levels
International Center for Agricultural Research in the Dry Areas
Item IRR Cost components IRR (%) Cost components
(%)
FIRR 50 Opportunity costs 90 Opportunity costs
Establishment cost
EIRR 25 Opportunity costs 48 Opportunity costs
R&D costs R&D costs
Subsidy (establishment Establishment costs
costs)
15

16. Benchmark Project
Model for Badia Rehabilitation
International Center for Agricultural Research in the Dry Areas

17. Results of Financial and Economic Benefit Cost
Analysis (BCA) of different water harvesting
techniques at the study area in Jordan
Financial BCA Economic BCA
International Center for Agricultural Research in the Dry Areas
Water harvesting NPV B/C NPV B/C
Technique FIRR % (JD/ha) Ratio EIRR % (JD/ha) Ratio
Traditional Pits 20.2 162 3.55 7.4 97 1.75
Shrubs with
28 277 4.96 13 208 2.5
water harvesting
Barley farmer
11.2 74 1.26 7.8 52 1.17
practice
Barley with
29 109 1.31 17 63 1.16
water harvesting
NPV is computed at a discount rate of 10%)

18. agricultural TFP growth
Regional level assessment of
18
International Center for Agricultural Research in the Dry Areas

19. Malmquist index for Total Factor Productivity (TFP)
TFP, is the product of ECh and TCh. Its value can be
greater than, equal to, or less than one indicating
International Center for Agricultural Research in the Dry Areas
whether agricultural productivity improves,
remains unchanged or declines.
Efficiency change (ECh) refers to the degree to which
a country uses the minimum feasible amount of
inputs to produce a given level of outputs.
Technical change (TCh) refers to shifts in agricultural
technology over time, indicating whether the
production frontier is improving, stagnant or
deteriorating.

20. Efficiency Change (ECh), Technical Change (TCh)
and Total Factor Productivity (TFP)
International Center for Agricultural Research in the Dry Areas
North Africa West Asia
Period
Algeria Egypt Ethiopia Morocco Sudan Tunisia Iran Jordan Pakistan Syria Turkey Yemen
ECh 1.01 1.00 1.00 1.01 1.00 1.03 1.00 1.05 1.05 1.00 1.00 1.00
1961–70 TCh 1.02 1.02 0.89 1.01 0.98 1.01 0.97 1.00 0.96 0.96 0.99 0.97
TFP 1.03 1.02 0.89 1.02 0.99 1.04 0.97 1.05 1.00 0.96 0.99 0.97
ECh 1.12 1.00 1.00 1.11 1.09 1.16 0.98 1.08 0.99 1.00 1.00 1.00
1971–80 TCh 1.08 1.05 0.92 1.01 1.00 1.05 0.97 1.05 1.01 1.04 1.07 0.87
TFP 1.21 1.05 0.92 1.12 1.09 1.22 0.95 1.14 1.00 1.04 1.07 0.87
ECh 1.02 1.00 1.00 1.04 1.00 1.03 0.98 0.98 0.97 0.99 1.01 0.99
1981–90 TCh 1.05 1.05 0.99 1.00 1.12 1.03 1.02 1.05 1.03 1.01 1.06 1.03
TFP 1.07 1.05 0.99 1.03 1.12 1.06 1.00 1.03 1.00 1.00 1.07 1.01
ECh 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.99 1.00 1.00 1.05 0.97 1.03 1.04 1.00 1.02
1991–2000 TCh 1.02 1.04 1.02 1.05 1.07 1.01 1.01 1.00 1.03 1.02 1.02 1.04
TFP 1.02 1.04 1.02 1.04 1.07 1.01 1.06 0.98 1.06 1.07 1.02 1.06
ECh 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.02 1.00 1.00 1.02 1.08 1.03 1.00 1.01 0.98
2001–07 TCh 1.16 1.01 1.12 1.09 1.02 1.08 1.07 1.06 1.03 1.06 1.10 1.19
TFP 1.16 1.01 1.12 1.11 1.02 1.08 1.10 1.15 1.06 1.06 1.12 1.16

21. 2500
45º line
Agricultur
al GDP per
agricultur 2000 Tk
al worker
Agricultural GDP (US$) per agricultural worker
International Center for Agricultural Research in the Dry Areas
and per
hectare of
1500
agricultur Tu Sy
al land
Ir
Al
1000
Mo
Jo
500
Su
Pa
Ye
0 Et
0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400
Agricultural GDP (US$) per unit of land (hectare)
Algeria (Al) Ethiopia (Et) Iran (Ir) Jordan (Jo)
Morocco (Mo) Pakistan (Pa) Sudan (Su) Syria (Sy)
Tunisia (Tu) Turkey (Tk) Yemen (Ye)

22. Tunisia
• Agricultural Value Added per Worker, increased more
than three times (1960 – 2007).
International Center for Agricultural Research in the Dry Areas
• Average Fertilizer Consumption increased by four
times (6 – 23 kg/ha);
• One tractor served every 300 ha in 1960s, increased
tractor use dropped the area per one tractor to 127 ha
by 2001–07.
• Irrigation systems continuously increased larger areas
from 110,00 to 350,000 ha (1960 – 2007).
• Investment in agricultural R& D is among the highest
in the region

23. Tunisia: Total Domestic Food Supply (1000 tons)
Under- Belo
Cereal Under
Cereal Wheat, rice, barley, maize, rye, Pop
nouris
weight w 2 Fruit
(milli supply
oats, millet and sorghum
on) (kg/pers
hed (%
in $/day
children (%
Fruits supply
on pop) (kg/pers
under 5 pop)
/year) (%) on /year)
2000-07 1670 (43%) 2716 (70%)
9.8 208 3.0 3.3 12.8 2000-07 -(8%) 1041(103%) (4%) 88
International Center for Agricultural Research in the Dry Areas
1990-99 1723 (55%) 1599(51%) 8.8 217 3.7 4.6 19.7 1990-99 -(6%) 819 (103%) (2%) 76
1980-89 1165 (49%) 1207 (51%) 7.2 209 3.0 8.5 25.1 1980-89 -(9%) 598 (107%) (2%) 60
1970-79 1018 (67%) 498 (33%) 5.6 187 1970-79 -(13%) 438 (112%) (2%) 43
1961-69 842 (78%) 312 (29%) 4.6 167
1961-69 -(16%) 435 (115%) (1%) 39
-30% 0% 30% 60% 90% 120%
-50% 0% 50% 100%
Meat Vegetable
Meats (5): Bovine, mutton, goat and supply Vegetables (3): Tomatoes, onions and supply
poultry meats, and offals (kg/perso other vegetables (kg/person
n /year) /year)
2000-07 -(7%) 2258 (106%) (1%) 194
2000-07 253 (98%) (2%) 26
1990-99 -(4%) 1666 (103%) (2%) 162
1990-99 185 (96%) (5%) 22
1980-89 -(2%) 1185 (100%) (2%) 145
1980-89 122 (92%) (9%) 18
1970-79 -(2%) 823 (102%) (0%) 125
1970-79 82 (98%) (2%) 15
1961-69 -(7%) 462 (107%) (0%) 81
1961-69 56 (100%) (1%) 12
-20% 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
-20% 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Sources: Own elaboration based on data from the World Development Indicators online
database for Prevalence of undernourished; Prevalence of underweight in children; and Exports Stock Variation Domestic production Imports
Poverty headcount. All other variables were obtained from FAOSTAT online database.

24. Tunisia Cereal production under current and
1000 tons
1960s average productivity levels
2,500
Solid line: Represent actual cereal production quantities.
International Center for Agricultural Research in the Dry Areas
Dotted line: Represent production of cereals using the 1960s average agricultural
productivity (kg/ha) levels.
2,000
1,722
1,670
1,500
1,165
1,018
1,000 842
917 873 902
788
500
-
1961-69 1970-79 1980-89 1990-99 2000-07
Source: Own elaboration based on World Development
Indicators database

25. Conclusion
TCh has been the main driving force of TFP.
International Center for Agricultural Research in the Dry Areas
• Investing in agricultural research is the main lever
to increase productivity,
• It is also essential for food security and rural
poverty reduction.
Low ECh values indicate long-time lags between
agricultural research investments and agricultural
extension programs
• Policies that support technology transfer, access to
inputs & finance are needed to reduce adoption
lags.

26. 26
International Center for Agricultural Research in the Dry Areas