r ~July 2002

~~0WS

2?57J~~ ~~@w2~Ty

)iWbi3bEj

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

Agriculture & Rural Development Working Paper

1[nvesting in Science forAgriculture and RuralDevelopment in the 21stCentury

Challenges, Issues andOptions

Task Force on Science & Technology inSecuring Food in the 21st Century,The World Bank

First printing: July 2002(The International Bank for Reconstruction and DevelopmentAgriculture & Rural Development Department1818 H Street, N.W.Washington, DC 20433

The findings, interpretations, and conclusions are the author's own and should not attributed to the WorldBank, its Board of Directors, its management, or any member countries.

Contents

Task Force Members ..................................................... IV

Abstract. v

Acknowledgements ..................................................... Vi

Abbreviations & Acronyms ..................................................... vii

Executive Summary ..................................................... viii

Introduction .1

The Challenges to Reaching Global Food Security ...................................................... 3

Agricultural Technology: a Tool to Meet the Challenges of Food Security .......................................... 12

The Societal Context of Agricultural Research and Development ..................................................... 1 7

The Way Forward: Options and Considerations ..................................................... 23References ..................................................... 26

Table, Figures, & Maps

Table 1. Review of estimates of the number of undemourished ...................................................... 3

Figure I Projected increase in demand for food, 1997-2020 ...................................................... 5

Map 1. Projected Water Scarcity in 2025 ...................................................... 11

Box 1. A new Sui Generis plant varietal law in India .................. ................................... 18

Figure 2. Altemative futures of agriculture ..................................................... 22

iii

Task Force Members

Task Manager

Eija Pehu

Task Force

Shawki BarghoutiLynn BrownDerek ByerleeSushma GangulyCornelis de HaanApama JoshiManuel LantinMona SurEugene Robert TerryRobert T. Watson

Written Contributions

Shawki BarghoutiLynn BrownDerek ByerleeCornelis de HaanAparna JoshiManuel LantinMorven McLeanEija PehuKatrine SaitoMona SurEugene Robert TerryRobert T. Watson

iv

Abstract

Modem agricultural technologies offer tremendous opportunities for contributing to improving the well-being of current and future generations, while at the same time raising a wide range of issues, questionsand challenges. The focus of this paper is to explore the potential of agricultural science and technologyto benefit the poor and food insecure populations in developing countries in the 21st century. This paperseeks to inform the development community's agenda and perspective about the significance of scientificresearch and technological development in agriculture, to present some of the new trends and changes inthe science itself and in its institutional and societal context and to reinforce commitment to promote,where suitable, knowledge-intensive rural development in developing countries.

Acknowledgements

This paper has been prepared by the World Bank's Rural Development Department Task Force onScience and Technology in Securing Food in the 21st Century. The Task force was advised by a panel ofexperts comprised of Hilary Feldstein, Paul Teng, David Magnus, Peter Hazell, William Hennessey,Morven A. McLean, Hans Schreier, and Philip G. Pardey, who met with Task Force members during anexpert consultation at the World Bank, Washington, D.C. on the 24-25 September 2001.

The paper was reviewed in draft form by Ian Johnson, Robert Thompson, Jock Anderson, Comelis VanDer Meer, Michael Crawford, Ariel Dinar, Moctar Toure, Jitendra P. Srivastava, SubramaniamJanakiram, Joel Cohen, Mary H. Rojas, Susanne Somersalo, Ana Iglesias, Cynthia Rosenzweig, RobertPotter, Tiina Huvio, Leslie Sklair, Anthony Hall and Lloyd T. Evans. Melissa Williams was copy editor,and also coordinated publishing and production of this paper for the Rural Development Department.

The research for this paper was supported by the Rural Development Department of the World Bank, andfunding for the consultation, editing and publishing provided by the CGIAR.

vi

Abbreviations & Acronyms

AFR Africa South of SaharaBSE Bovine Spongiform EncephalopathyCGIAR Consultative Group on International Agricultural ResearchCIAT International Centre for Tropical AgricultureCIP International Potato CenterEAP East and South East Asia and China [Pacific countries are excluded]FAO Food and Agricultural OrganizationIARC International Agricultural Research CenterIFC International Finance CorporationIFPRI International Food Policy Research InstituteIIASA International Institute for Applied Systems AnalysisIPM Integrated Pest ManagementIPR Intellectual Property RightsIRRI International Rice Research InstituteISAAA International Service for the Acquisition of Agri-Biotech ApplicationsIWMI International Water Management InstituteLAC Latin America and the CaribbeanLDCs Less Developed CountriesMENA Middle East and North AfricaNARS National Agricultural Research SystemSA South AsiaTFP Total Factor ProductivityTRIPS Trade-related aspects of Intellectual Property RightsUNEP United Nations Environment ProgramUSDA United States Department of AgricultureWIPO World Intellectual Property OrganizationWTO World Trade Organization

vii

Executive Summary

The achievement of global food security continues to present a significant challenge to humandevelopment in the 21st century. Increasing global population, the degradation and depletion of naturalresources, the impact of climate change, and the leveling out of enhanced crop yields achieved during theGreen Revolution all add to this challenge. This paper focuses on the potential of current and foreseeableagricultural technologies to increase the diversity, quality and quantity of food produced in developingnations, and on the role of development organizations, such as the World Bank, in stimulating scientificinnovation and the application of new technologies within developing countries.

Although estimates from a number of studies indicate that the numbers of food-insecure persons globallyare declining, albeit at different rates, there are contradicting projections for some regions, notably Sub-Saharan Africa. In this region it has been estimated that the number of food-insecure will increase byabout 43 per cent over the next 10-15 years. Current studies reveal that sustained economic growth aloneis not sufficient to end hunger and that there is some urgency to implementing appropriate strategies toaddress food production issues within developing countries, which will be almost exclusively responsiblefor the increases in food demand over the coming decades.

Some of the principal limitations to increased food production have to do with natural resourceconstraints, such as the availability of arable land and water for irrigation, crop losses due to pests anddisease, and the inherent limitation on productivity potential of specific crop cultivars. It turns out that allof these issues are being addressed, among other more conventional means, through the application ofmodem biotechnology to crop improvement. To cite but a few examples, these innovations include:[Aijthe production of plants with increased tolerance to salt and heavy metals; and plants with alteredmetabolism that develop faster and yield better.

These modem molecular technologies are being applied along with other agricultural practices, such asintegrated pest management, water resource management, and biodiversity conservation, in order toachieve a multi-disciplinary approach to improving agricultural productivity and in this way mitigate foodinsecurity, and it is important that the varied disciplines that comprise agricultural research have strongproponents, intellectual momentum, and resources.

In developing countries, many public sector research institutes are experiencing shortages in funding inhuman resource capacity and in infrastructure, which has significant consequences for food security. Thechallenge is to find ways to reverse this trend through advocacy and identification of new investmentopportunities. In addition, a challenge is to lever and stimulate private sector resources for innovation indeveloping countries. A review of current practices on governance, funding, IP management, contractualarrangements between public and private organizations, and the like, could be a starting point fordeveloping novel investment, technical, institutional and policy solutions for different countries.

Both the access to, and protection of, new technologies related to agricultural productivity and valueaddition are key considerations for stimulating agricultural research and development. There are [A2]threepossible areas of involvement for the donor community: facilitating access to technologies on behalf ofclient countries; providing technical support and capacity building to assist client countries in establishingIPR laws and regulations; and providing direct support to scientists in client countries lacking ]PRregimes to develop and commercialize their innovations through the establishment of strategicinternational collaborations.

Qualitative and quantitative changes in food production chains in developing countries are necessitatingnew ways of thinking about research and development support. A possible way forward includes broad-based stakeholder consultations, including other development organizations, academia, and the privatesector, followed by careful analysis to guide the development of new entry points for development

viii

assistance in agriculture, including research and development. These new entry points can include thedevelopment of technical and human resource capacity in the areas of food safety, biosafety, quarantine,pesticides and IPR regimes.

The current polarization of views with respect to funding research on environmental protection vs.agricultural research reflects a view that the interests of agricultural development are at odds withenvironmental sustainability. There is a need to move towards a more dynamic vision of this relationshipand assure pooling of resources and energies of different professional communities to a common goal ofglobal food security.

The application of modem biotechnology in agriculture has given rise to a number of public concernsaround food safety, the environmental impact of genetically modified organisms, and related social,ethical and economic implications. Future policies on,supporting agricultural research and developmentmust be informed by these considerations and, along with first-hand experiences from working in thefield, communicated with the global community.

In view of the preceding issues and considerations, one option is to explore the role of an internationalassessment of science and technology in food productivity and safety in order to provide support forinformed national and international policy formulation. International scientific assessments, such as theone on climate change, have proven particularly valuable where international action is required and theissues are complex.

ix

Introduction

Our goal is global food security. Food Security is a concept built upon three equallyimportant pillars: 1. food availability; 2. food access; and 3. food use.

Rural Development and Agriculture, the World Bank Group

The achievement of global food security continues to present a challenge to human development in the21 st century. Increasing global population, the degradation and depletion of natural resources, the impactof climate change, and the leveling out of enhanced crop yields achieved during the Green Revolution alladd to this challenge.

Today, a broad consensus exists that there is sufficient food available in the world to meet the dietaryenergy requirements of all people, however, lack of access to food by households, and especially byparticular members within them, continues to contribute to food insecurity. Equally apparent, is the factthat solving issues of food and income distribution have proven largely intractable, so that from apractical perspective the solution to food security remains linked to increasing food production.

The focus of this paper is the potential of current and foreseeable agricultural technologies to increase thediversity, quality and quantity of food produced in developing nations. In order for this potential to berealized, significant interventions by development organizations to stimulate scientific innovation and theapplication of new technologies within developing countries will be required.

Food Security and Hunger

The total amount of food produced today could feed 12 billion people, but hunger is still prevalent indeveloping countries, and food insecurity and malnutrition are projected to increase and persist to 2020and beyond (IFPRI 2001). The growth in world population, estimated to reach 9.3 billion by 2050, willplace increasing pressure on available food supplies. Coupled with this, is the increasing urbanization ofpopulations, changes in lifestyles and food preferences, and globalization of markets and technologies forfood production. Although declining, it is estimated that there will remain 400 million food insecurepersons globally in 2030 (FAO, 2000).

It is important to understand these trends in future food demand and the impact on the global naturalresource base in order to develop appropriate policies that strategically address world hunger. Hunger isas much a function of poverty as it is of inadequate food supply. In some regions, focusing on local foodproduction, as opposed to depending on imports of staple food crops, creates an opportunity to evaluate arange of options that may be used to reach the goal of food security. In Africa, the strategy is to increaseyields and improve nutritional quality by diversifying diets. In Latin America and South East Asia, whichhave better functioning markets, the strategy leans towards promoting production of high-valueagricultural commodities for urban and export markets. This production will help activate ruraleconomies and improve the purchasing power of rural inhabitants

Historical Role of Science and Technology in Achieving Food Security

The food supply is finite, limited by the natural resource base available to support production. What isunlimited is the resource of human ingenuity, which has been successfully mobilized over centuries torespond to the challenge of providing for the food needs of growing populations. The hunting andgathering of food was eventually replaced as a primary means of food acquisition by the cultivation of

food crops . Rice, maize, and wheat were domesticated between 10,000-6,000 BC to feed 50 millionpeople. A further phase of innovation followed from 2000 BC-1500 AD with the domestication of thehorse, the invention of the plough, Sumerian grain harvests, and the terracing of hills, which permittedfarmers to feed a population of 500 million. In 1800s, with a world population of two billion, agriculturalscience evolved as a research discipline to greatly advance plant nutrition, plant protection, plantbreeding, livestock improvement, livestock production and disease management. In the period afterWorld War II, technological advances in food production continued so that a population of three billioncould be fed. This included the introduction of farm inputs such as synthetic fertilizers, herbicides andpesticides, and the continued mechanization of farming in the developed world.

Until this time, food security was largely met by key innovations in agricultural production, and throughexpansion of the arable land base. Feeding the fourth billion required a new breakthrough to achievesignificantly higher yields per unit of land area. The most significant contribution came from plantbreeding: dwarfing genes were successfully introduced into wheat and rice to reduce plant height andimprove the proportion of grain yield over the entire plant biomass. In order to achieve their yieldpotential, these varieties were cultivated in high-input production systems. From 1960 to 1990, a 3 percent annual increase in cereal production was attained.

In the 1930s, the adverse effects of some agricultural practices became apparent (e.g. the "dust bowl" inmid-western US and Canada). Critical comments started to appear already in 1950's and by mid-I 980sseveral agricultural, environmental, and other civil society organizations publicized and politicized theenvironmental and human health effects of chemical and mechanized agriculture. Agricultural researchinto production practices such as minimum tillage, drip irrigation, and integrated pest and nutrientmanagement, emerged as viable alternatives to high-input agriculture for the production of some crops insome environments.

In the context of the foregoing, the three major challenges for agricultural science and technology in thecoming decades will be:

1. To generate new technologies that raise the yield potential and provide efficient but sustainable foodcrop-based systems;

2. To create opportunities for diversification in agricultural value-chains, and;

3. To strive for production systems that improve yield and yield stability in areas of low agriculturalproductivity.

Conclusion

The world food situation in the 21st century is mixed. To date, advances in agricultural productivity haveresulted in an adequate food supply, which, due to differences in access to food, has unfortunately not yetbeen translated into a world free of hunger. More importantly, in order to meet the food needs of theworld population in 2020, yields of food crops must increase, diversification of production systems mustproceed, and nutritional quality of foods must improve. Yield gains must largely come fromintensification of production on the current arable land base to avoid expanding the area of land undercultivation to marginal lands. This must be accompanied by more efficient and sustainable use of naturalresources, particularly water. The challenge for policy makers and development organizations will be tosecure an enabling environment for agricultural research and technology transfer to do its part in assuringfood security in the communities where it is needed the most.

The historical development of agriculture has been condensed from Evans, 1998.

2

The Challenges to Reaching Global Food Security

Introduction

It is estimated that the world population wvill grow annually by 73 million people from 1995 to 2020. By2020 the global population is expected to be 7.5 billion, increasing to 9.3 billion by 2050. As the worldpopulation grows, pressure on available food supplies will increase. Global cereal demand is expected torise by 1.3 per cent per annum until 2020, corresponding to 2.5 billion metric tons of grains (IFPRI,2001). Demand for food will be further affected by the rapid urbanization of the developing world: theassociated rise in incomes, and changes in lifestyles and food preferences, will have implications for foodproduction, food distribution, and consequently, food security.

Food Security

Review of Food Security Prediction Models

In trying to address the problems of food insecurity it is important to have reliable estimates of thenumbers of food-insecure persons, both at the global and regional levels. These estimates indicate wherethe problems of food insecurity are most severe, and are important to both the development of effectivepolicies and allocation of resources. There are several studies that provide estimates of current foodinsecurity and projections of future trends. The following is a comparative review of global food securitypredictions published by the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO 2000a, 2000b), USDA (2000),Rosegrant et al. (2001), Shane et al. (2000) and Senauer and Sur (2001). Current projections indicate thatthe 1996 World Food Summit goal of reducing the number of undernourished people in 2015 to half thatof the1996 level, will not be met.

Table 1. Review of estimates of the number of undernourished

millions

Region USDA USDA FAO FAO FAO Senauer Senauer2000 2010 1995- 2015 2030 & Sur & Sur

97 1996 2025Asia 307 177South Asia 284 165 82 379 156East Asia 240 144 86 62 36China 192 57Sub-Saharan Africa 344 435 180 184 165 285 433Latin America 62 47Latin America & 53 45 32 77 71CaribbeanNorth Africa 48 31Near East & North 33 38 35 39 39AfricaNIS 13 6 73 38Total 774 694 790 576 401 1,110 830

Each of the studies uses different regional breakdowns, theref'ore regional estimates are not strictly comparable.Source: USDA (2000), FAO (2000a); Senauer & Sur (2001)

Among the currently available projections of the number of food-insecure people, the FAO's projectionsare the most optimistic. The FAO's most recent estimates project a decline in the number ofundernourished people from 790 million to 576 million in the period of 1995/1997 to 2015. The number

3

of undernourished people is predicted to decline further to 401 million people by 2030. The United StatesDepartment of Agriculture (USDA), in its most recent assessment of food security, estimates that therewere 774 million food- insecure people in the world in 2000 and projects that the prevalence of foodinsecurity will decline by approximately 10 percent to 694 million food insecure people in 2010.

Shane et al. (2000) examine the impact of total factor (TFP), agricultural factor and labor productivity onfood security in 2015. The authors' results suggest that increased TFP growth would have the mostpronounced effect in terms of reducing the prevalence of food insecurity. If TFP growth were to grow byan additional 2 percent per year in low- income countries this would be sufficient to reduce the number offood-insecure people in the world to 629 million in 2015.

Senauer and Sur (2001) provide estimates of the number of food-insecure people in 2025 underalternative scenarios of income growth and distribution, and changes in food prices. This study indicatesthat even if countries experience robust economic growth, there will still be 830 million food-insecurepeople in 2025. According to the authors' estimates, the most dramatic decline in the number of foodinsecure would result from the combined effect of income growth, a decrease in food prices, and aredistribution of income in favor of the poor. Under this scenario the number of food insecure would fallto 380 million representing approximately 5 percent of the projected population in 2025.

While the above studies provide estimates of undernourishment and food insecurity, the InternationalFood Policy Research Institute (IFPRI) provides estimates of nutrition security using the prevalence ofchild malnutrition as a measure. IFPRI estimates that there were 166 million malnourished children(children with a low weight for their age) in the world in 1997. Despite abundant food availability,IFPRI projects that 132 million children under the age of five will be malnourished in 2020, a decline ofonly 20 percent from 1997.

Although these projections indicate that the number of food-insecure people will decline at different rates,a common conclusion in all the studies is that food insecurity will increase in Sub-Saharan Africa, whereprospects for rapid economic growth are limited. The USDA assumes that 44 percent of the foodinsecure in the world live in Sub-Saharan Africa, a figure which is projected to increase to 62 percent by2010. The FAO estimates that 22 percent of the undernourished lived in Sub-Saharan Africa in its basescenario for the years 1995/97 which will increase to 32 percent in 2015.

Regardless of the limitations of global food security predictions, the estimates are important benchmarksand indicate the urgency of appropriate policies to address widespread food insecurity. Current studiesreveal that sustained economic growth alone is not sufficient to end hunger. Senauer and Sur (2001)estimate the growth rates necessary to end hunger by 2025 or 2050 with a constant income distributionand real food prices. Their results show that per capita economic growth rates of 6.3 to 7.0 per centannually are required to end hunger by 2025, while growth rates of 3.5 to 3.9 per cent could end hungerby 2050. Growth rates of these magnitudes are higher than can be optimistically expected. Developmentof technologies to improve the productivity of poor producers and their empowerment through socialinclusion in decision-making is needed.

Demographic Changes in Rural Communities

Demographic changes in rural communities will affect both how food is produced and who is producingit. In many areas, especially among the poor, men are leaving agriculture to work in towns or othercountries, leaving women to take care of the family farm. War and HIV/AIDS further aggravate thissituation. In Sub-Saharan Africa about one-third of all rural households are headed by women andHIV/AIDS has already left some areas dependent on children and the elderly to tend to the fields. InZimbabwe, it has been estimated that HIV/AIDS has reduced agricultural output of affected small farmhouseholds by 50 per cent (FAO, 2001). Rural populations are also aging: the number of rural elderly indeveloping and transitional countries is projected to double between 1995 to 2030 (Marcoux, 2001). Thissituation is especially grave in Eastern Europe, Northern Africa and Eastern Asia. Besides vulnerability

4

of the rural elderly, this trend poses a challenge for future agricultural productivity. If research programsto promote agricultural productivity and poverty alleviation are to be effective, they must recognize thesedemographic trends and engage innovation and technology generation to address the needs of thesefarmer groups.

Food Demand

The projected increase in the global demand for food' will take place almost exclusively in developingcountries. It is anticipated that 85 per cent of the increased demand for cereals and meat between 1995-2020 will be in the developing world. By 2020, the per capita amount of cereals consumed by adeveloping country person will be about half that consumed by a developed country person. Meatproduct consumption will be one-third of that consumed by a developed country person. In east Asia, percapita demand for cereals as food and livestock feed, and meat products will far outstrip those in otherregions. The consumption of root and tuber crops is projected to increase by 55 per cent in 2020compared to the demand in 1997 with most of this in Sub-Saharan Africa (IFPRI 2001).

Figure 1 Projected increase in demand for food, 1997-2020

160 '

X 1420 - ' CerealsW 120

100 100 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~Roots and.~80 Tubers

60 01 Meata) 40

20* -

0Developing Industrializedcountries countries

Source: IFPRI, 2001

Urbanization is another trend putting further pressure on the physical and human capital of theagricultural sector to produce enough food. By 2020, every other developing country national will beliving in urban areas, up from 38 per cent in 1995. Shifting of the population from a rural to urban settingincreases the need to expand marketed surplus at a much more rapid rate than the rate of populationgrowth (Brown and McCalla, 1998). Urbanization also lengthens the food chains both in distance andtime, which has implications for marketing, transport infrastructure, processing, and storage, which inturn has further implications for food safety.

Food Distribution

Meeting the food needs of a growing, and increasingly urban population with rising incomes, will alsohave a profound impact on global agricultural trade. Trade in cereals and meats is forecast to grow with

5

net cereal imports of developing countries doubling between 1995 and 2020, and meat imports increasingeightfold during the same period. The globalization of food distribution has raised issues about foodsafety, intellectual property rights, and impacts on biodiversity. Effective and credible regulation of newtechnologies, and the associated technical and enforcement capacity are now global interests, not onlybecause of concern for domestic public health and environmental safety, but also as potential constraintsto international market access and competitiveness.

World agricultural trade expanded at an average annual rate of over 5 per cent from 1990 to 1998.Imports of agricultural commodities in mid-income developing countries have increased significantlyover the past decades as a result of increased income levels. In contrast, the participation of LDCs ininternational agricultural trade is insignificant. Their share in world agricultural exports has droppedsteadily, from 3.3 per cent from 1970-79 to 1.5 per cent in 1990-98. LDCs' share of world imports hasalso declined slightly from 1.8 per cent in 1970 to 1.6 per cent in 1998. Regionally, cereal production inthe Middle East and North African region is projected to grow almost at the pace of population growth,but the region will remain the greatest importer of grain accounting for 34 to 44 per cent of net imports ofall developing countries. The cost of imports in these countries is largely covered by oil export revenues.Latin America has accounted for about 10 per cent of grain imports to developing countries. This willincrease somewhat because production will not keep up with population growth, and demand willincrease as a response to improved living standards. In Latin America, about one-fifth of food importsare financed by agricultural exports. The Asian nations, particularly China, will increase their cerealimports significantly. Sub-Saharan Africa, with its high population growth and slow economicdevelopment, has projected a need to increase its net imports of cereals 2-6 fold in the coming decades.Agricultural exports will have to cover over one-half of the import cost of cereals in many Sub-SaharanAfrican countries (FAO 2001).

World trade in livestock, milk, fish and associated products accounted for one-quarter of global trade inall food and agricultural products in thel995-99 period and trade in these commodities is expected toincrease significantly in the future. A significant trend in food trade has been the shift from exportingprimary commodities to exporting value-added processed goods. In Asia and Latin America, the share ofprocessed products rose from 10 per cent in the 1960s to about one-third of their total agricultural exports.In some countries such as Argentina, Brazil, and Malaysia, the share of traded processed foods is over 50per cent. In sub-Saharan Africa the share of processed foods remained at the 15 per cent level for the past30 years (FAO 2001).

Increasing food trade, especially of processed foods, is changing the business arrangements of foodmanufacturers and traders, and their interaction with developing markets. Both traditional multinationalprocessing firms, and the increasingly active multinational supermarket chains, are directly procuringproduce from developing countries. Exports of high-value food products from developing countries areincreasingly produced in a contractual arrangement with large corporations and are subject to stringentfood safety, quality and timeliness of delivery specifications. Effective participation in the growingglobal markets requires developing-country producers to have the relevant capacity including access tospecialized information, technology, assets, institutions, infrastructure, and liquidity.

Natural Resource Constraints to Food Production

The agricultural productivity challenge for the future is based on the fact that, on average, about 73million people will be added annually to the world's population, increasing it by 23 per cent to reach 7.5billion in 2020. These projected population increases will generate significant demands for food, fiber,and industrial products. The high incidence of desertification, land and water resource degradation, theloss of forests, and loss of biodiversity, all have negative impacts on productivity. Consequently,agricultural productivity and food security must be evaluated and addressed against the background ofnatural resource constraints.

6

Land

Land in rural areas is the foundation of people's livelihood. It is central to poverty reduction and criticalto food security. Stable access to adequate land of acceptable quality facilitates enhanced security.Historically, the availability and access to reserve arable land for rural development and agriculturalexpansion was not an ecological issue, however, today most available arable land is already in use. Anyfurther expansion of agriculture would mean incorporating fragile and marginal areas, especially indeveloping countries, where population growth is high, poverty is endemic, and existing institutions forland management are weak.

Only about 31 per cent of the global land base is suitable for sustainable arable cropping, and another 33per cent for sustainable rangeland use (Luyten, 1995). Land that is unsuitable for agriculture requiresintensive labor and maintenance e.g., on slopes, is prone to erosion e.g., shallow soils, or is not amenableto mechanization e.g., too stony, too steep. Agriculture may be undertaken on such land for a few yearsby people without alternatives, after which the topsoil will be lost or exhausted, and the land abandoned.While on one hand there is a physical limit to the expansion of land for agriculture, on the other there aresignificant portions of suitable land being lost in an in-eversible manner because of degradation, and theexpansion of urban infrastructures e.g., cities, roads, recreational areas.

Land as a natural resource has been losing its productive capacity because of both loss of surface area andquality. In spite of significant losses, however, there was a net expansion of agricultural lands between1960 and 2000, because the average annual gain through deforestation, clearing and drainage of wetlandsexceeded the average loss, particularly in Africa, Latin America, and the Middle East. In South Asiaalready more land appears to be used than is 'suitable' for sustainable agriculture (FAOSTAT, 2000).This implies that the fragile land brought under cultivation is unlikely to sustain agriculture in the longterm. Indeed, several countries including Bangladesh and Pakistan, already have a negative land balance(Young, 1999).

The rate of loss of good quality, productive, agricultural land is more difficult to quantify. The loss ofproductive capacity refers to the decline in potential production of land, the reduction of efficiency ofinputs, and the increase in production risk. When actual yields are, relatively high, degradation expressesitself as yield stagnation or reduction. Large-scale degradation of land quality is caused by water erosionas in South East Asia and Central America, soil mining as in Africa, and salinization in areas with largeirrigation schemes. It is important to note that three times more land, often of very good quality, is beinglost to urbanization and road infrastructures (5-8 million ha/annum) than to salinization and erosion (2million ha/annum).

Land degradation data can also be effectively translated into reduced capacity for food production. Whenpotential production is high in comparison to actual production, raising productivity is technicallyfeasible, although it may be economically difficult. When production levels are close to the ceiling, evenextensive investment in agricultural research may bring only limited progress. Land degradation also hasa direct impact on income generation as it leads to less profitable agriculture, lower farm income, andconsequently reduced household food security.

Another means of measuring the land resource is to examine the availability of grainland per person. Forexample, Pakistan's population is projected to double by 2050. The available grainland is expected toshrink from 0.08 ha/capita to 0.03 ha/capita. If Nigeria keeps on the projected population growthtrajectory the average grainland area/capita will reduce from the present 0.15 ha to 0.07 ha. Thisdevelopment will significantly increase the number of landless in the rural areas. A strategy to promotebroad-based rural growth will be required to avoid niral poverty feeding into urban poverty, thus posingyet another challenge for agricultural and food systems research.

7

Water

Less than one per cent or 43, 000 km3 of the world's freshwater resources are available for beneficialhuman uses. In 1995, the average annual per capita renewable water resource was estimated at 7500 in3 ,a decrease of 41 per cent from the 1965 level. With increasing world population, average annual percapita water availability is projected to further decrease to 5500 m3 in 2025 (IWMI 2001).

While the available water resources at the global level may be sufficient to fulfill human needs, much likefood, their distribution across countries and regions is very uneven. At one extreme, the Latin Americanand Caribbean countries, with only 8 per cent of world's population, are endowed with 34 per cent of theworld's total renewable water resources. At the other extreme, South Asia, with over one-fifth of theworld's population, has only 5 per cent of the renewable water resources. There are also significantvariations in water resource endowments within each of these regions. Moreover, the inappropriate useand management of surface and ground water resources globally has caused their degradation, depletion,and pollution, including that caused by unsustainable agricultural activities.

Agriculture dominates water consumption, accounting for 74 per cent of total water supplies in 1995. Asa result of agricultural and rural development efforts, enhanced food productivity has been achievedthrough an expansion of irrigation, along with adoption of high-yielding varieties, chemical inorganicfertilizers, and better agronomic practices. At present, the world's irrigated cereal area accounts for 30per cent of the total harvested area, but it contributes up to 43 per cent of the total cereal production. Onaverage, yield on irrigated cereal lands is 60 per cent higher than that on rainfed lands, however, there aresubstantial variations in irrigated cereal yields across regions and countries. Yield of irrigated cereals inSouth Asia, and East Asia and Pacific regions is 172 per cent and 100 per cent higher than that of rainfedlands, respectively. In the East Asia and Pacific region, average per capita calorie supply increased by 37per cent over the period from 1965 to 1995, largely owing to increased cereal production under irrigation.Similarly, irrigation-induced yield growth in the Middle East and Latin America contributed significantlyto the overall increase in food production in these regions. Unlike these other regions, yield growth inyields of food crops in Africa has been very slow: while cereal production over the past thirty years hasdoubled, productivity growth has played a small role. In Africa, only 5 per cent of the total cereal areawas irrigated in 1995, and Africa has benefited the least from the global wave of irrigation development(IWMI, 2001).

Cereal area in developed countries is projected to continue to decline in the IWMI-base case scenario,however it is expected to increase in developing counties, primarily in Africa. A significant part of therain fed area in South Asia and East Asia is projected to be converted to irrigated production, and morenew lands are expected to be brought under rain-fed cultivation in Africa. Irrigated cereal yield in allcountries is expected to grow by 1.1 per cent per annum over the next 25 years in the IWMI base case,however, production deficits in various regions are projected to increase due to water scarcities.

The following key points regarding future water situation should be noted (IMWI, 2001):

* Water is becoming an extremely scarce resource in many countries, with growing demands andincreasing competition across sectors and uses.

* With rapid growth in urbanization and industrialization in most developing countries, demand forwater in these sectors is expected to continue to grow - which will require transfer of water fromagriculture to these sectors.

* Water allocations to the environmental sector, which received little attention in the past, are expectedto increase with growing recognition of the need and benefits of water in this sector.

* Despite the expected large growth in water withdrawals for the above sectors, agriculture will remainthe dominant water user in most developing countries.

8

* Even with projected slow growth in overall rural population, over 3.3 billion people will live in ruralareas by 2025, with over 90 per cent of them projected to live in South Asia, East Asia and thePacific, Middle East and Africa regions.

* Sustainable agricultural development and crop productivity enhancements will remain important forrural poverty alleviation and overall rural development in the developing regions - sustainable andenvironmentally friendly irrigation development will be the key driving force to achieve growth inproductivity.

* Countries facing water scarcity will need to develop additional water supplies through investments inadditional water storage infrastructure or micro-scale irrigation developments. Those under physicalwater scarcity conditions will need to invest in techniques to improve the productivity of water and inoverall improved management of water resources.

* Irrigation-induced environmental problems are increasing in many countries, particularly Asiancountries, and need to be addressed on priority basis-as these problems have serious consequencesfor productivity and poverty.

Biodiversity

Maintaining or increasing biodiversity is the goal of sustainable agricultural systems. The GlobalBiodiversity Assessment (UNEP, 1995) suggests that the earth contains some 14 million species, themajority in tropical forests and marine systems. However, there is evidence that this heritage is beingrapidly eliminated, with adverse consequences for the environment and its sustainable economic use. Theroot causes of biodiversity and habitat loss are largely socio-economic and include poverty, demographicchanges, public policies, volatile markets, political and social change, and economic development.

Agriculturists have created an impressive storehouse of knowledge through the selection, storage andpropagation of landraces. Intra-species variation is critical for agriculture as conventional crop andlivestock breeding programmes exploit the natural genetic variation found within each species.Additionally, plant and animal species variation is important for subsistence farming in the tropics andsubtropics.

Climate Change

There is little doubt that both agriculture and food security will be affected by climate change. Averageglobal surface temperatures are expected to rise by an estimated 1.4 to 5.8 °C in the next hundred years,and the frequency of extreme climate events is predicted to increase dramatically. The impact of climatechange on food production will vary depending on the severity of the change. If the temperatureincreases are towards the higher end of the predicted range, there will be substantial reduction in potentialcrop yields in most tropical and sub-tropical regions, while crop production in the temperate regions willbenefit from longer growing seasons and higher temperatures (CGIAR, 2000).

Global climate change poses special challenges regarding food production. The Intercenter WorkingGroup of the CGIAR has developed a research agenda to respond to these challenges. It includes reducingNO2 emissions by improving N use-efficiency, by agronomic, silvicultural and genetic means; exploringthe potential for reducing emissions through limiting extensification and deforestation using improvedtechnology, management strategies and public policies; and reducing carbon losses in land use, improvingcarbon sequestration by identifying and promoting policies and activities that facilitate participation incarbon offsets. To achieve this, it recommends developing international strategies that achieve appropriatesharing of the adjustment burden of carbon offsets between developed and developing countries,institutional innovations that target C offset payments to the poor (C-farming). The agenda furtherproposes the consideration of management strategies that reduce methane emissions by ruminants andrice and enhance methane uptake by soils, sharpening predictive tools in key developing country agro-

9

ecosystems, and studying the population dynamics of pests and diseases, especially their adaptation toclimate change to determine new IPM and other plant protection strategies. Finally, it focuses onunderstanding how the rural poor adapt their livelihood strategies to climate change and how institutionscan be strengthened to support adaptation strategies (CGIAR, 2000).

Conclusion

There are tremendous challenges to alleviating food insecurity in a world where food production mustmeet the needs of a growing population with changing dietary habits. It is already apparent that the goalof reducing the number of food insecure in the world in 2015 to one half of the level in 1996 may not beachieved. Specific attention needs to be directed to Africa, where the number of food insecure isexpected to increase by 2015 and where gains in crop yields have not met the promise realized in othercountries through the Green Revolution.

Three major trends in the development of global food systems can be identified: increased demand forfood; increased need for agricultural diversification to raise rural incomes, and; continued expansion ofinternational trade in agricultural commodities and the commensurate need to ensure regulatorycompliance with global conventions in food safety, biosafety and intellectual property rights.

Limitations in natural resources, especially water, the degradation of arable and range lands, and theimpact of climate change, will continue to restrict food production in many developing countries. Inabsence of an aggressive strategy to capitalize on both advances in agricultural science research, and amove towards sustainable agricultural production, particularly in marginal areas, reducing the number offood insecure will remain an elusive goal.

10

Map 1. Projected Water Scarcity in 2025

PROJECTED WATER SCARCITY IN 2025

_ PHYSICAL WATER SCARIY i ::

ECONOMIC WATER SCARCITY .

LITTLE OR NO WATER SCARCITY

/ ThIS map -as produced by the1 NOT ESTIMATED MP DeSin LOit Of Theap ct Th orsid Bank.lb-- b ..darias, Colorsnaninationsand miyother information showno.

THAN 10% OF THEIR ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~thi. M~Pd an t inp1y, oa the part ofNzrte: The Wrld CONTIE TAroup, my judgmantINDICATES COUNTRIES Tb'AT WILL4\ on the legalstatus of my ritr y,orIMPORT MORE THAN 10% OF TREI any endorsement or acceptance ofCEREAL CONSUMPTION IN 2025 -. such boundries IBRD 31660

SOURCE IMWI, World Wote, Viion, The Hoage, Mnh 2000 NOVEMBER 2001

Agricultural Technology: a Tool to Meet the Challenges of FoodSecurity

Introduction

In 2001, there is a significant body of work that describes the finite nature of the world's ecologicalresource base and its limited ability to support the current world population, let alone sustain an estimatedten billion people by 2050. Agricultural research and technology can play an instrumental role inaddressing this challenge, as one part of a comprehensive socio-economic framework that is aimed atreducing poverty, increasing incomes, and facilitating access to health and education for the rural poor.

Research and development programmes that combine elements from the biological, social, and economicsciences are required to address the need for improved food and fiber production while striving toconserve and protect natural resources. These must be built on a foundation of past successes, and mustbe progressive enough to incorporate the promise of new innovations in agricultural science andtechnology.

Trends in Agricultural Technology

There are three trends in agriculture that have the potential to greatly affect food production systems andtheir sustainability:

* New developments in the biological sciences that have the potential to increase both the yield andquality of food and fiber; permit food production in unfavorable areas; and to modify dependence onnatural resources by facilitating more production on less land (intensification) and by adding value atthe local level to commodities currently being produced.

* The development of improved sustainable farming systems that utilize both crop physiology and cropecology-based knowledge systems (e.g., agronomy, plant breeding, ecological farming, integratedpest management, and minimum tillage crop production).

* Multidisciplinary and multistakeholder approaches to agricultural research have evolved out of theneed to understand the livelihood strategies of rural families so that research can be appropriatelydirected. Examples include the participation of subsistence farmers in variety breeding programs andin the development of rural technologies applicable to their farming needs.

Each of these trends are introduced briefly below.

Recent Advances in Agricultural Biotechnology

Biotechnology has many applications in agriculture including:

* Cell and tissue culture. In the plant sciences, tissue culture permits the production of whole plantsfrom individual plant cells (cloning) under laboratory conditions. It is a widely used technique toproduce disease-free crop plants and it is essential to the production of genetically engineered crops.In the animal sciences, cell and tissue culture techniques are used to produce vaccines for diseasemanagement and control, and for veterinary disease diagnosis.

* Genetic engineering of crop plants to express novel traits such as insect and disease resistance.

* DNA fingerprinting is used to differentiate plant varieties of the same species by identifying uniquemolecular markers.

12

* Marker assisted selection involves the use of DNA sequence "markers" to select organisms (e.g.,crops, livestock ) that possess desirable gene(s) for a particular performance trait (e.g., rapid growth,high yield, etc.) for subsequent breeding or propagation. Marker assisted selection has been utilized inmany crop plant breeding programs since the mid-1970s.

Crop Production

The evolution of crop biotechnology has been viewed as occurring in three distinct waves, or generations.The first generation of genetically modified crop varieties is generally altered for agronomic traits that areencoded by a single gene, such as virus- or insect-resistance, or herbicide tolerance. This initial phase ofa revolution in crop agriculture is already well established, with about 50 million hectares of herbicidetolerant soybean, and insect- and herbicide-resistant maize, cotton, and canola under cultivationworldwide (James, 2002).

In recent years, the genetic alterations in new plant varieties under development have become morecomplex, with more genes being involved in the modification and an increasing tendency to alter existingmetabolic pathways, or to introduce new ones. These new products will form the second and third wavesof genetically modified crops, plants that have been modified to express altered nutritional characteristics(e.g., increased vitamin levels) and to act as factories for the production of pharmaceuticals or as deliveryvehicles for vaccines. Some examples are:

* Photosynthesis is the primary energy conversion reaction in nature. Plants have developed twodifferent photosynthetic systems for CO2 fixation, the C3 and C4 pathways. Plants with the C4pathway (e.g. maize) have an enzymatic and anatomical system that enhances CO2 fixation in a moreefficient way than plants with the C3 pathway (e.g., rice). Research conducted at IRRI indicates thatyields in irrigated rice fields need to rise from the present 5 t/ha to 8 t/ha by 2010 to meet the demandof the growing population in Asia (Fischer et al., 2000). Ku and colleagues at Washington StateUniversity have been working on the photosynthetic system of rice. They have succeeded intransferring three photosynthetic genes from maize to rice to improve CO2 fixation by 30 per cent andgrain yield by 35 per cent. The group is now collaborating with rice breeders in China to develop ahigh quality hybrid rice in five years with an average yield of 13.5 tons/ha. If successful, thisapproach could lead to significant gains in several food crops (Edwards, 1999).

* An agro-ecological zoning analysis by FAO and IIASA (Fischer et al. 2001) has shown that almost 40per cent of the world's soils suffer from fertility constraints and 6 per cent are affected by salinity oracidity. Combining drought-resistant varieties developed through genetic engineering with improvedwater and nutrient management and versatile crop rotations may provide viable, low-input solutionsto the problem of poor crop yields in these areas, which are often cultivated by poor communitieswith a limited asset-base. Drought and salt tolerance in plants are complex traits that involvemetabolic and architectural characteristics. In spite of this complexity, engineering of some of thecomponent characteristics has been shown to improve water use efficiency and abiotic stresstolerance (Zhang and Blumwald, 2001).

* Genetic engineering shows tremendous promise as a means of enhancing the nutritional quality ofstaple food crops. This is exemplified by the production of a rice variety genetically engineered toexpress increased levels of beta-carotene, a precursor to vitamin A. It has been estimated that thediets of 200 million children are deficient in vitamin A, and over 500,000 cases of blindness areattributed to vitamin A deficiency. The first transgenic lines of enhanced-vitamin A rice (golden rice)have been made available to IRRI for further selection and testing. The same trait has also beenexpressed in mustard, and will be transferred to maize, wheat and cassava.

* Global post-harvest food losses are estimated to be around 10 with highest losses occurring indeveloping countries (Oerke et al. 1995). Innovations such as genetically modified fruits and

13

vegetables with delayed ripening traits can ease transport of commodities and reduce post-harvestlosses significantly. Delayed ripening melon and tomato varieties have been already commercialized.

Livestock Production

To meet the growing demand for livestock products, research in livestock production needs to focus onboth reducing production losses due to animal disease, and increasing feed efficiency. Improved feedconversion is essential to offset the projected increase in demand for global feed resources, and thepollution from animal waste that will accompany expanding livestock production. Delgado et al. (1999)contend that an annual improvement of only 1 per cent in feed conversion in the developing world woulddecrease feed grain demand by 60 million ton per year in 2020. Some examples are:

* To mitigate productivity losses from animal morbidity and mortality, vaccine development should bedirected to managing: vector-borne diseases in tropical and sub-tropical regions e.g., tsetse-transmitted African animal sleeping sickness, East Coast fever, African swine fever, anddermatophilosis, and; diseases transported through, and affecting, trade e.g., foot and mouth disease.

* The most sustainable form of livestock disease management and control is through heritableresistance. DNA fingerprinting and marker assisted selection are being used to identify genes thatcontrol disease resistance. The introgression of such genes into vulnerable breeds will be asignificant accomplishment in animal breeding, and critical to regions such as Sub-Saharan Africa,where disease pressure in livestock is very high.

* With abundant sunshine and rainfall, the tropical savannahs produce very high amounts of biomass ofvery poor feeding value. Manipulation of the rumen ecology of cattle, through the introduction ofgenetically modified rumen microorganisms, may permit improved digestion of this fibrous material,which would be of great benefit to dairy and beef production in tropical and sub-tropical regions.

* Pork production is increasing rapidly, especially in Asia and there are already polluting levels ofnutrient run-off from pig farms in many countries. High phosphorus content in the manure ofmonogastric animals, such as swine and poultry, arises from their inability to digest phytate, aphosphorus-containing compound in feeds. To address these problems, transgenic pigs have beenproduced to express the enzyme phytase in their salivary glands. Phytase is an enzyme that digestsphytate to and release bound phosphorus so that it can be utilized. Fecal phosphorus output isreduced by 75 per cent in these phytase producing pigs (Golovan et al. 2001).

Aquaculture

* In-land shrimp production is limited by a virus disease. Diagnostic kits using antibodies to detect thevirus have been developed and are being used by small- and large-scale farmers to select for andeliminate infected shrimps before the disease spreads.

* The development of transgenic fish is being explored in several countries and transgenesis maybecome a cost-effective way of enhancing indigenous species or rescuing endangered species. Atransgenic Atlantic salmon with enhanced growth is close to commercialization in the US. Thesefish produce higher concentrations of growth hormone, causing them to increase their size and weightup to six times faster than conventional salmon. Their final size is equivalent to normal salmon, butthey achieve it in less time.

Recent Advances in Sustainable Farming Systems

Sustainable farming takes an agro-ecological approach to food and fiber production. It seeks to makeoptimal use of goods and services provided by nature through integration of biophysical regenerative

14

processes and through better utilization of available farm labor and organic material, as well as improvedknowledge and farm management.

Sustainable management of agro-ecosystems is essential if food production requirements are to be met.Land degradation can be reversed through restoration of the structure and chemical content of the soil.Improved landscape management can reduce the flow of water and wind over land surfaces. Research onminimum tillage has shown tremendous potential for reducing erosion and moisture loss, and improvingsoil structure. Adoption rates of these practices have been remarkable. For example, in Argentina andBrazil there is a total of 30 million ha of both large and small holder farmland under minimum tillage(Pieri et al. 2001). Examples of some approaches to sustainable farming are provided below.

Integrated Pest Management

Integrated Pest Management is an approach toward plant protection which was developed to overcomereduce chemical pesticide use, in favor of greater dependence on farmer management skills and location-specific knowledge of agroecosystems. IPM practices have been developed for many crops and hasbecome a significant factor especially in cotton and rice production. Full adoption is still slow because anIPM approach is knowledge-intensive and requires training and strong links between research, extensionservices and farmers. Due to the many social benelits of pesticide use reduction and its contribution tothe long-term sustainability of agricultural production systems, especially of poor producers, investmentof public funds into IPM research and extension is justifiable. Introduction of modem genetics approachesof insect resistant crops in the IPM context could enhance the speed of reduction in pesticicle use.

Conservation of Biodiversity

With regard to biodiversity, the promising areas for science and technology interventions are:conservation of the genetic variation within species and populations for crops and livestock; conservationof the number of species for subsistence and cash income, and habitat preservation, especially of modifiedhabitats such as farmland, rangeland and forests. Meclicinal plants are a special group among plant geneticresources, which are in high demand. There are many documented cases of overexploitation in responseto high demand. Trade volumes have become large, and are of significant value. The result is that thenatural resource base is becoming degraded in certain areas, and an increasing number of species arebecoming threatened. Production technologies that could lead to domestication of some species couldretain production levels without the risk of the species becoming extinct. Biodiversity is a tremendousasset for many countries and modem science and technology can add value to that resource.

Multidisciplinary Research on Sustainable Livelihoods

Many development practitioners and scholars have been frustrated by the limitations of disciplinaryparadigms to capture the richness of livelihood strategies in rural communities. In the 1980s, a farmingsystems approach emerged that attempted to define a holistic framework of the factors that influence on-farm agricultural productivity. At the same time, gender analyses and subsequently wider social analyses,focused on people and their roles and responsibilities in securing food. Saito et al. (1994) demonstratethe importance of gender analysis in a study that showed that agricultural productivity would increase by22 % if women farmers in Africa had access to the same technical advice and inputs as men farmers.

A research and development framework called livelihood analysis championed by Department forInternational Development (DFID) (Camey 1998) takes the socio-economic analysis of rural communitiesa step further. Within this framework the livelihoods of rural families and communities are analyzedthrough the asset base they have, including financial, natural, human, physical and social capital and theinteraction of these. It demonstrates how often an improvement in 'one form of capital changes impacts onthe others. For example, the increasing population of Machakos, Kenya led to land fragmentation,deforestation, soil degradation, and poverty. As remittances from those who migrated out started to flow

15

back into the communities, farmers invested these in their land and planted trees. Interest to diversify landuse was also supported by improved road connections to markets and introduction of high valuecommodities. As a result of these changes, soil fertility improved and household incomes increased(Tiffen et al. 1994). As this example illustrates, understanding multifaceted rural livelihoods enables us tobetter frame the need for, and impact of, innovations and technologies.

Conclusion

Today, agricultural research operates along a continuum from the technologically reductionist disciplineslike molecular biology and genetic engineering, to integrated management systems such as IPM, and tothe continued application of traditional knowledge to bettering agricultural productivity. Each of thesereflect the diversity of social and ecological systems that agricultural research must address. Realbreakthroughs in the future are likely to come from alignment of these approaches, as researchers activein the different fields focus their energies on the common goal of alleviating hunger and malnutrition.

16

The Societal Context of Agricultural Research and Development

New applications of technology in agriculture have raised social, economic, political, legal, and ethicalconcerns. In the field of agricultural biotechnology, intellectual property right protection has beenpursued by the developers of these technologies as a means of securing a return on their investment inresearch and development. There have been accusations that in doing so the accessibility of theseinnovations to developing countries is limited. Given that some of the current generation ofbiotechnology products have disease and insect resistance traits that are equally applicable to tropical andtemperate food crops, there are concerns about securing the transfer of these innovations to thedeveloping world. Moreover, private sector companies have, to date, invested little in crops such ascassava, sorghum and millet, or in tropical diseases affecting livestock.

There is increased societal concern over the introduction of some new agricultural or food processingtechnologies and their associated risks, real and perceived. For example, international, regional andnational regulatory frameworks are being developed to secure safe application of biotechnology inagriculture and these regulatory programs are closely scrutinized by politicians, the media and otheropinion leaders. In the past, stakeholders in agricultural research 'were largely considered to be farmersand the research community. This is no longer the case. Today the array of stakeholders in agriculturalresearch extends to consumers, civil society organizations, private sector companies, and local, national,regional and international governments and government organizations. Many of these groups are drivenmore by concerns about environmental protection than agricultural productivity. Policies that direct theapplication of agricultural research and technology in rural development to affect poverty reductionshould work with different stakeholder groups, acknowledge stakeholder concerns, and strive to findconsensus between public and private sector interests. In this way, strengths may be optimized to achievethe greatest return on human and financial investment.

The Agricultural Research Agenda and Shifts in Funding

The Green Revolution stimulated a lot of investment interest in agricultural research and the rate of publicspending on R&D increased from 11.8 billion in 1976 to nearly 21.7 billion in 1995 worldwide (Pardeyand Beintema, 2001). Since the early 1990s, the rate of spending on public agricultural research hasslowed down, and in some countries declined. In developed countries nearly half of the public sectorresearch is performed by universities compared to 25 per cent in Latin America and 10 per cent in Africa.During the same period, non-profit organizations have appeared as providers of research goods; inColumbia, for example, they provide for about 25 per cent of agricultural research. While public sectorspending has reduced, private sector investments in agricultural science have increased significantly sincethe 1980s. In 1995 one third of the total investment in agricultural research was private ( I1 billion USD).Its distribution depends on the economic development of a country and is only 5.5 per cent in LDCs(Pardey & Beintema, 2001). The International Agricultural Research Centres (CGIAR), established in1971, receive about 330 million USD from 55 donors and this represents about 1.5 per cent of the totalpublic spending in agricultural R&D annually. This shift in the funding and provision of agriculturalresearch from the public to the private sector, has been attributed to expanding intellectual property rightsprotection for new products and processes, as well as public sector movement away from applied to basicresearch.

There are new developments in public sector research agenda, which have increasingly broadened fromproduction agriculture to include issues related to the environment (e.g., ground water pollution and soilerosion), food safety, biosafety, risk assessment, and socio-economic and gender studies. This changereflects the increasing influence of a range of non-traditional interest groups in the formulation of theagricultural research agenda.

17

Intellectual Property Rights

A defining characteristic of the late 20th century was the privatization of knowledge and technologybrought about by the strengthening of intellectual property rights (IPRs) in industrialized countries, andgradually in developing countries. The private sector dominates biotechnology research globally,including much of the basic research that underpins it. Strengthening of IPRs in developing countries asrequired under international treaties, such as the TRIPS agreement, is leading to growing privateinvestment in R&D in those countries. However, there are significant market failures in harnessing rapidgains in science for the benefit of poor producers and consumers in developing countries. The publicsector, national and international, will have to play a major role in filling this gap, and to do so will haveto build capacity to develop innovative partnerships with the private sector in order to gain access toneeded research tools and technologies.

Developing countries face a number of challenges in this new environment. On the one side, they need toprovide incentives for the private sector to invest in R&D to address local problems, but must also ensurethat IPR laws are sufficiently narrow in scope to protect only those inventions that have a clear value tosociety, and at the same time promote competitive biotechnology and seed industries. Modernization ofIPR systems, and especially capacity for enforcement of laws at all levels - legal systems, researchorganizations and seed industries - are priorities. A final challenge is to prevent biopiracy and to adaptIPR systems to protect indigenous knowledge and genetic resources so that the playing field in IPRnegotiations and applications with the global life-science companies is leveled. One of the first attemptsto balance these various interests is provided by a new sui generis law on plant varietal rights that is likelyto be approved in India in the coming months (see box 1).

Public research organizations in developing countries Box 1. A new Sui Generis plant varietal law inmust evolve strategies and capacities in the Indiamanagement of intellectual property to gain free, or India is likely to be the first country to approve aconcessionary access, to priority tools and 'home grown' or sui generis law on plant varietaltechnologies that are relevant to solving problems of rights that explicitly recognizes both farmers' andpoor producers and consumers. They will need to breeders' rights. Passage of the law was required bydefine their bargaining chips and assert ownership, the TRIPS agreement of the WTO. The new lawand develop innovative means of segmenting markets which has already been approved by the lower housethat complement private sector interests. These of India's parliament makes provision for farrners toagreements highlight the complexity of the challenge register varieties that they have conserved orin developing new forms of partnerships between a developed. It also provides for farmers to save,varinevelofpubing ane private actors in agricultural exchange and sell seed of protected varieties. Thevariety of public and private actors i agricultural law also establishes a National Gene Fund toscience and technology area in developing countries - maintain community gene banks; breeders who usenational research systems with very diverse capacities traditional varieties in their crossing programs wllin biotechnology, international research centres, local pay a royalty to the fund. At the same time, the lawprivate R&D companies, global life science provides a 'fast track' for approval of single genecompanies, and advanced research institutes in both transgenic varieties that are "essentially derivedindustrialized and developing countries (Byerlee & varieties" as a stimulus to biotechnology R&D.Fischer, 2001). While this law has many innovative aspects, it will

be a number of years before its impacts on formalLooking to the future, it is likely that application of R&D and on farmers' innovation will be apparent.IPRs in industrialized countries will be narrowed andclarified, and that the complexity of IPR negotiations Source: Byerlee & Fischer (2001), Sahai (2001)will stimulate the development of IPR brokers andclearing houses. Some of the largest developing countries with strong science and technology capacitiesare also likely to gain by strengthening IPRs for application to their own inventions, whether in the publicor private sectors. However, for the majority of world's poor, the key challenge will be to developinnovative approaches to provide free access through the public sector to the tools of modern science. In

18

many situations, there are substantial cost-efficiencies for small and medium-sized countries inestablishing regional mechanisms to facilitate patenting and plant varietal protection. In the long run, it ispossible that some form of global patent registration will evolve.

Maintaining the Knowledge and Skills Base in the Public Sector

Public sector research institutes in developing countries are experiencing shortages in funding, expertise,and infrastructure. This situation is further exacerbated by the fact that trained scientific professionals areleaving their home countries, a loss of both investment and human capital. For example, over 30 000science PhDs of African decent are working outside their home countries. This impacts not only nationaldevelopment of science and technology, but also creates significant gaps in the ability to absorb and applytransferred technology.

Sustaining the Intellectual Momentum

Scientific discoveries build on prior knowledge and expertise. Sustaining intellectual momentum in manydeveloping countries is undermined by the tremendous loss of knowledge that occurs through frequentinterruptions of funding in the national agricultural research systems leading to a loss that is far largerthan the absolute loss of talent (Pardey & Beintema, 2001). A similar pattern rises because ofdiscrimination in science. There are very few women scientists and scientists from minorities who make itto senior decision making positions - positions from which they!could provide intellectual leadership.This results not only in a significant underutilization of human capital in the research systems globally,but it also influences the kind of research that is proposed, funded and undertaken thereby reducing thepossibility of diversification in the nature, objectives, and focus of research.

Intellectual Management Culture

Qualitative research on the co-evolution of technology and orgahizational networks has revealed thattechnological progress is accompanied with adaptive public/private organizational networks. Randomnessof innovation creates fluctuations and chaos in the system which act as seeds to generate newtechnologies and value chains (Coates et al. 2001). This has implications for the management ofinnovation: when to allow freedom, chaos and creativity, and when to direct energy to the stable phase ofproduction and dissemination/marketing.

As technological innovation advances, it is critical that the scientific capacity of governmental and non-governmental organizations remain current. In absence of doing so, public and political confidence inscience advice diminishes, and the scientific reputation and credibility of those providing advice erodes.The development of core competencies in the disciplines required to understand and evaluate newtechnologies provides an improved basis for the assessment of potential risks and/or benefits, and canimprove the quality of risk management decisions.

The Future Role of the CGlAR

Created in 1971, the CGIAR is an association of 58 public and private entities that support a system of 16international agricultural research centres. The goal is that these Centres would mobilize cutting-edgescience to reduce hunger and poverty in developing countries, improve human nutrition and health, andprotect the environment. The Centres are autonomous, but are linked by a commitment to a commoncause. They work collaboratively with partners in more than 100 countries, mostly in the developingworld. Technologies resulting from the Centres' research are internatiolnal public goods.

The CGIAR of the future (say in 2025) will be different in terms ot both its research agenda, and the roleit will play in the global agricultural research system. Its future research priorities and strategies willdepend on the goals of the shareholders supporting CGIAR research in its Centres, the future of thenational agricultural research systems (NARSs) in developing countries, the rate of advances in scientific

1()

vertical dimension refers to the choices made by society about use of green areas. Agriculture mayattempt to be independent of the surface area or may make a multifunctional use of it. The horizontal axisdescribes the relationship of society to biological process. One extreme represents the efforts to have fullcontrol over these processes while the other refers to a more adaptive regime. This representationprovides for four futures.

Figure 2. Alternative futures of agriculture

Multifunctionality

Emotive AgricultureObjective of farming is not food production,rather it is based on the need of the green area toprovide special expenences to people

Combined Agriculture Society focuses on the spintual, religious,Agrnculture and food production are only aesthetic, therapeutic andone form of land use educational aspects of farming, the care of

o Green area used for various activines, e.g. nature and animals and offers spontaneity,wildhfemanagemet,hvestocw e beauty and meaning related to existence

e_ Strong focus on restoring biodiversity whileo making productive use of land -O Networking of farms and cooperation

reinforces plunactivity of farms and themultifunctionality of agriculture

CDs

o Organic production +r. Based on current organic farming practices whereen food production is the main objective of agricultureo Production is tied to surface area and diversified

Conventional Agriculture + It id conducted on the tenms of nature andii Based on current agriculture unpredictability of biological processes accepted

Full Control over bioprocesses Value of products is based on their uniqueness andHigh-tech raw material production non-material propertiesEnvironment and animal welfareConsumer-orientated, profit-focused, Farmers' incomeFocused productionBliotech and IT

Independentof Surface

Area

Control AdjustmentRelationship to Biological Processes

Source: Vihinen and Laurila, 2001.

These value systems also drive research questions and shape research agendas. The range of disciplinesfrom aesthetics and ethics to economics and biological sciences creates novel opportunities forcooperative research, but also challenges for the scientific community which historically has been strictlydiscipline-driven. In general terms, emotive agriculture and organic production systems may beconsidered more relevant to developed countries and conventional and combined systems to developingcountries. However, all of these systems exist in parallel in many developed and developing countries,and they should all be considered as research agendas are developed or re-evaluated.

22

The Way Forward: Options and Considerations

Informed by the preceding contextual information on trends in food production and food security, and thepotential of agricultural science to enhance food quality and supply, this chapter seeks to identify optionsand considerations for the development community in their policy decisions about science and technologyin agricultural and rural development.

Agricultural Research and Development

In developing countries, public sector research institutes are experiencing shortages in funding in humanresource capacity and in infrastructure. This trend is mirrored in developed countries, where there hasbeen a significant shift in research funding from the public to the private sector. For the developingworld, these trends have significant consequences, both from the perspective of intellectual propertyrights (IPRs) and negotiating access to technology, and also with respect to directing research anddevelopment towards questions of relevance to agricultural productivity and competitiveness indeveloping countries.

Public Sector

To correct the trend of stagnating public sector agricultural research will require advocacy that clearlydefines the benefits that will be attained through public investment. The World Bank among otherdevelopment organizations can play a role inL campaigning for investments in agriculture in general, andagricultural research in particular. Advocacy work should also solicit leadership support for increasedinvestments in agricultural science and technology through accountability and effective incentivemechanisms.

Poor facilities, low salaries and few career options, especially for women scientists, are causing braindrain from many developing countries. These aspects should be carefully reviewed when planning forassistance to support agricultural research and development investments in the client countries. SomeAsian countries are already applying liberal employment packages including educational allowances forchildren, spouse employment policies, and flexible working hours in order to attract scientists back totheir own countries.

Private Sector

The private sector has become a significant player in agricultural research and development, andunderstanding corporate culture and motivating factors is important for identifying avenues that will spurprivate investment in developing countries. In this area, the key stakeholders can continue their dialoguewith different interest groups with the aim of assessing the interests of different stakeholders to proceedtowards constructive solutions through enhanced cooperation. 'The challenge is to identify newinstitutional arrangements to use public sector resources strategically to assist resource poor farmers andalso to leverage private sector resources for their benefit. In addition, the donors may directly stimulateprivate sector innovation in developing countries for example by supporting the establishment of researchand technology commercialization mechanisms such as science parks, which may be either physical orvirtual, and which can bring together academia, local start-up companies, and investors. Support for newcompanies may require the implementation of new or revised IPR guidelines, entrepreneurial training forscientists entering into business, and assistance in forming strategic alliances with companies in othercountries.

23

Intellectual Property Rights

As already noted, both the access to, and protection of, new technologies related to food security are keyconsiderations for stimulating agricultural research and development. From the developmentcommunity's position, there are three possible areas of involvement: facilitating access to technologies onbehalf of client countries; providing technical support and capacity building to assist client countries inestablishing IPR laws and regulations; and providing direct support to scientists in client countries lackingIPR regimes to patent and commercialize their innovations through the establishment of strategicinternational collaborations.

The question of access to technology is relatively new for many organizations working in agriculture.Thus, a variety of approaches are being explored including: (i) establishment of an IPR clearing house tofacilitate IPR negotiations; (ii) development of a tool kit of key enabling technologies with the freedom tooperate in developing countries; (iii) establishment of an international fund to contract development ofpro-poor technologies from the private sector; and in selected cases, (iv) the potential for compulsorylicensing of key technologies. The continuing involvement of the international development communityin the development of these approaches through engagement in multi-stakeholder consultations andsupport for best-practices for technology-transfer to client countries is important.

As a part of their regulatory framework in modernizing the agricultural sector, many countries aredeveloping IPR regimes, but require technical and financial resources for this, including expertise in legaland business issues related to IPR and licensing. There is a role for the donor organizations, including theWorld Bank to develop a resource base of best practices and training expertise in these areas, includingadvice to countries on the TRIPS agreement of WTO. The review and approval process of patents isevolving and there is a need for the World Bank among other development agencies to maintain closeliaison with the World Intellectual Property Organization in order to remain current on thesedevelopments and to understand the impact of changing IPR regimes on the innovation environment inclient countries.

Balancing Science, Society, and the Environment

The forces of urbanization, diversification, and globalization are acting to qualitatively and quantitativelychange food chains in developing countries, and necessitate new ways of thinking about research anddevelopment support. Overall, the culture of innovation and product development is changing from alinear pattern (from discovery to product development to commercialization) to a network of complexprivate and public sector partners engaged in both innovation and product development. There is also aheightened client and regional orientation in the setting of the research and development agenda. Thisplurality requires innovative approaches to supporting research and development within developingcountries. Recent experiences with competitive grants programmes, especially in Latin America,complemented with management capacity building, may serve as useful models.

A possible way forward includes broad-based stakeholder consultations, including other developmentorganizations, academia, and the private sector, followed by careful analysis to guide the development ofnew entry points for international assistance in agriculture, including research and development. Thesenew entry points can include the development of technical and human resource capacity in regulatoryframeworks and their enforcement (food safety, biosafety, quarantine, pesticides and IPR regimes).

Presently, donor motivation to fund environmental protection is higher than for agricultural research.There is a degree of polarization of perspectives as professionals on each side of the funding divide tendto view the interests of agricultural development at odds with environmental protection. There is a needto accelerate the shift beyond this static understanding towards a more dynamic vision of this relationship.The key is to align the vision and energies of the people and departments working on environment andagriculture to look for and support research projects that allow environmental sustainability to co-exist

24

with agricultural productivity. The process to learn, understand and align the strategies of environment,rural development, water, and forestry should be encouraged and initiated, and interdisciplinary teamsestablished and funded. This interdisciplinary approach can also be extended to include social scienceanalysis, and best practices need to be recorded and profiled. From the World Bank's perspective, it isimportant to promote an agricultural development approach that flows off the broader rural developmentstrategy and which outlines the direction it will take in support, of the agricultural sector includingresearch and development. This step is important to initiate and conduct a better informed dialogue withall stakeholders and also to develop better investment plans.

The application of modem biotechnology in agriculture has given rise to a number of public concerns thatinclude issues related to food safety, impact of genetically modified organisms on the environment, andethical, social and economic implications. The development community must continue to be cognizant ofthese issues, and the associated public debate, as it develops future policy on supporting agriculturalresearch and development.

In view of the complexity and dynamism of the preceding issues and considerations, an option to explorewould be to conduct an international assessment on the role of science and technology in foodavailability, safety and security. Such a process woulcl provide information for national and internationalpolicy formulation. International scientific assessments, such as the one on climate change, have provenparticularly valuable where international action is required and the issues are complex.

Conclusion

The major challenge for developing societies and the donor community is to create an enablingenvironment for science and technology to serve as a tool for economic growth and competitiveness inrural development. The on-going biological revolution combined with the ability to handle large sets ofdata interactively has significantly accelerated the process of discovery. However, many of these earlydiscoveries are protected by patents and the challenge is to find new institutional and contractualarrangements to make those innovations available to answer the questions of food production anddiversification. In the longer term, the challenge for science is to improve the yield potential of cropsgrown in both high potential as well as marginal environments to meet the projected doubling of fooddemand. This will require active networking of scientists from different disciplines ranging frommolecular biology to ecology and social sciences to frame the research questions right and to identify themost cost-effective and sustainable approaches for different problems. Science does not operate inisolation. The scientific community needs to interact and communicate with different stakeholders toknow of their concerns and interests and to discuss the potential, benefits and risks of different scientificapproaches.

25

References

Brown, L, and McCalla, A. 1998. Global Urbanization Trends: Implications for Food Systems and Food Security.The World Bank. Washington D.C.

Byerlee, D, and Fischer, K.. 2001. Accessing modem science: policy and institutional options for agriculturalbiotechnology in developing countries. IP Strategy Today. 1-2001.

Carney, D. 1998. Sustainable Rural Livelihoods. What contributions can we make? Department for IntemationalDevelopment (DFID).

Coates, V, Farooque, M., Klavans, R., Lapid, K., Linsone, H., Pistorius, C. and Porter A. 2001. On the future oftechnological forecasting. Technological Forecasting and Social Change 67:1-17.

Consultative Group on International Agricultural Research (CGIAR). 2000. The Challenge of Climate Change: PoorFarmers at Risk. CGIAR Annual Report 2000. 18p.

Delgado, C, Rosegrant, M. Steinfeld, H. Ehui, S. and Courbois, C. 1999. Livestock to 2020, the Next FoodRevolution. 2020 Food, Agriculture and the Environment Discussion Paper 28. International Food PolicyResearch Institute. Washington D.C.

Evans, L.T. 1998. Feeding the Ten Billion. Plants and Populations Growth. Cambridge University Press. UnitedKingdom. 247p.

FAOSTAT. 2000. Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) online database of agricultural statistics(http:H/apps.fao.org/page/collections).

Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO). 2000a. Agriculture: towards 2015/30, Technical Interim Report. GlobalPerspective Studies Unit. Rome: FAO.

-. 2000b. The State of Food and Agriculture. Food and Agriculture Organization, Rome.

Fischer, G, Shah, M. Van Velthuizen, H., and Nachtergaele, F.O. 2001. Global Agro-ecological Assessment forAgriculture in the 21 st Century. Laxenburg: International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis and Foodand Agriculture Organization. 33p.

Fischer, K.S., Barton, J., Khush, G.S., Leung, K. and Cantrell, R. 2000. Collaborations in rice. Science 290:279-280.

Golovan, S., Meidinger, R., Ajakaiye, A., Cottrill, M., Wiederkehr, M., Barney, D., Plante, C., Pollard, J., Fan, M.,Hayes, M., Laursen, J. Hjorth, J., Hacker, R., Phillips, J. and C. Forsberg. 2001. Pigs expressing salivaryphytase produce low-phosphorus. Nature Biotechnology 19, 741-745.

International Water Management Institute (IWMI). 2001. Water for rural development prepared for the World Bank.Colombo, Sri Lanka, 94 p.

James, C. 2002. Global review of commercialized transgenic crops: 2001. International Service for the Acquisitionof Agri-biotech Applications (ISAAA).

Luyten, J.C. 1995. Sustainable World Food Production and Environment. Wageningen, Netherlands: AB-DLO.

Marcoux, A. 2001. Population ageing in developing societies: how urgent are the issues? Population ProgramService, Food and Agriculture Organization Women and Population Division.

Oerke, E.C., Dehne, H.W., Schoehnbeck, F. and Weber, A. 1995. Crop production and crop protection: estimatedlosses in major food and cash crops. Amsterdam, Elsevier.

Pardey, P.G, and Beintema, N.M. 2001. Slow Magic: Agricultural R&D a Century After Mendel. Washington, D.C.:International Food Policy Research Institute.

Pieri, C. and Terry, E. 2002. No-Till Farming for Sustainable Rural Development. World Bank, in press.

26

Rosegrant, M, Paisner, M., Meijer, S. and Witcover, J. 2001. Global Food projections to 2020. Emerging Trendsand Alternative Futures. International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI), Washington D.C. 206p.

Sahai, S. 2001. TRIPS Review: Basic Rights Must be Restored. Economic and Political Weekly XXXV1.

Saito, K., Mekonnen, H., and Spurling, D. 1994. Raising the productivity of women farmers in Sub-Saharan Africa.World Bank Discussion paper 230. 132p.

Senauer, B, and Sur, M. 2001. Ending global hunger in the 21 st century: projections of the number of food insecurepeople. Review ofAgricultural Economics 23:66-81.

Shane, M., Teigen, L., Gehlhar, M. and Roe, r. 2000. Economic growth and world food insecurity: a parametricapproach. Food Policy 25:297-315.

Tiffen, M., Mortimore, M. and Gichuki, F. 1994. More people, less erosion: environmental recovery in Kenya.Overseas Development Institute (ODI) in association with John Wiley & Sons. 328p.

United Nations Environment Program (UNEP). 1995. Global Biodiversity Assessment. V. H. Heywood (ed.).Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK.

United States Department of Agriculture (USDA). 2000. Food Security Assessment. Washington, D.C.: USDA.

Vihinen, H, and Laurila, I.P. 2001. Future Prospects of Finnish Agriculture. In Finnish Agriculture and RuralIndustries. Finland: Agricultural Economics Research Institute.

Young, A. 1999. Land resources, now and for the future. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK. (319 pp).

Zhang, Hong-Xia and Blumwald, E. 2001. Transgenic salt-tolerant tomato plants accumulate salt in foliage but notin fruit. Nature Biotechnology 19, 765-768.

27

28

29

30

Iplyd-1*11 lup

4.0z w l it

IIF-.11 IFIT a r:.u

-~~~~f