SPIA Update on Progress on 2019-2021 Workplan

The SPIA 2019-2021 progress report seeks to provide a timely and relevant input into One CGIAR discussions and offer an update to SPIA stakeholders on the progress and ongoing activities of SPIA. The report describes studies in the pipeline, ongoing country-level data collection efforts, and details of initiatives at different levels to strengthen impact culture within the CGIAR

Benefit-Cost Meta-Analysis of Investment in the International Agricultural Research Centers of the CGIAR

This study was undertaken by David Raitzer, on behalf of the CGIAR Standing Panel on Impact Assessment. The author addresses the question: do the documented benefits from CGIAR research justify the total investment in the CGIAR so far? The basic objective of the study is to derive a set of plausible and highly credible aggregate estimates of the benefits accruing from System innovations, and to set such against the present value of the entire CGIAR expenditure. The study contains several figures and tables. The forward was written by Hans Gregersen, Chair of the Standing Panel on Impact Assessment

Evaluation of the Impact of Integrated Pest Management Research at the International Agricultural Research Centres

An evaluation of the impact of integrated pest management (IPM) research at IARCs commissioned by the Impact Assessment and Evaluation Group (IAEG) and prepared by Hermann Waibel with Diemuth Pemsl of Hannover University. The study was completed in September 1999. The document also includes an excerpt from the summary of proceedings of the CGIAR 1999 Mid Term Meeting where the evaluation results were presented, and a foreword by IAEG Chairman Hans Gregersen.The study was based on analysis of existing documentation and findings. It considered centers' self-assessments of impact, the impressions of their clients and partners, the quantity and types of materials published, and the quality and validity of existing studies of rates of return. Dr. Waibel assessed the efficiency and effectiveness of IPM work at the centers, and linked those results to an overall assessment of impacts associated with IPM activities. He pointed out that the goal of IPM research should not be high returns to that component, but rather to optimize returns to the entire crop-management system.The study finds long term rates of return on investment in IPM to likely reside in the 15-40 percent range. It also notes that while the technological paradigm remains dominant at the centers, emphasis is shifting toward management, thus the social science aspect, and means to reduce the lag between research and adoption. Agenda document, CGIAR International Centers Week 1999

Environmental Impacts of the CGIAR: An Initial Assessment

Preliminary evaluation of the environmental impact of research undertaken by the CGIAR and its partners. The evaluation was conducted by a two member panel consisting of Michael Nelson and Mywish Maredia, and was completed in October 1999. The study was commissioned by the Impact Assessment and Evaluation Group (IAEG) which became TAC's Standing Panel on Impact Assessment (SPIA) before it was published. The document also contains an excerpt from the summary of proceedings of the CGIAR 1999 Mid Term Meeting where the evaluation results were presented, and a foreword by IAEG Chairman Hans Gregersen.This study may be considered the first phase of a longer term effort, and considers unplanned and unaccounted for environmental costs and benefits attributable to past research. It focuses on evaluating changes in the use, management and conservation of land resources, which the panel believed are likely have effects orders of magnitude greater than any other positive impacts of CGIAR research.Given the shortage of reliable data, the method used was analysis of different scenarios, rather than economic models. The authors concluded that a very large amount of land, in excess of that available, would have been required to equal the increased production of seven mandate crops and permanent pasture attributed to CGIAR research. The study concluded by listing issues for further empirical assessment, questions on next steps, and recommendations on further activity. In view of the large costs involved, it suggested that the CGIAR provide guidance on the depth and breadth of evaluation of environmental impact it desired

Environmental Impacts of Productivity-Enhancing Crop Research: A Critical Review

Study by Drs. Mywish Maredia and Prabhu Pingali reviewing evidence of the possible negative impacts of productivity-enhancing technologies on the environment. Identifying "negative land savings" as a suitable measure of negative impact, the authors find salinity problems associated with irrigation as the most complete available index of land savings lost, and together with less precise measures of the impacts of intensification and monocultures, estimate global land savings lost to be on the order of 90-100 million hectares. This is several hundreds of millions of hectares less than the positive land savings attributable to CGIAR research on eight mandated crops (see "Environmental Impacts of the CGIAR: An Assessment.")A treatment of efforts by the CGIAR and NARS to mitigate negative impacts on the environment follows, focusing on the development of pest-resistant varieties and integrated pest management practices which reduce the need for pesticides. While this was identified clearly as an area of significant advances, farmers' adoption of these varieties and practices was not matched by a concomitant reduction in pesticide use - which represented a major failure in disseminating the implications of the new technologies for pesticide requirements. The study ends by pointing to the complexities of relating environmental impacts to agricultural research, given the many factors other than research that contribute to these impacts. Adding to this difficulty of attributing the causes of environmental impacts to research, the authors describe a common tendency of literature to conflate the green revolution with the larger phenomenon of agricultural intensification