scenario development for international assessment of agricultural science and technology for...

Scenario Development for International Scenario Development for International Assessment of Agricultural Science and Assessment of Agricultural Science and Technology for Development (IAASTD)Technology for Development (IAASTD)

Mark W. RosegrantMark W. RosegrantIFPRI

Washington DC, USA

INTERNATIONAL FOOD POLICY RESEARCH INSTITUTE

Overview of the TalkOverview of the Talk

What is IAASTD? What are scenarios and why use

them? Proposed approach for IAASTD

scenarios Overview of IMPACT global food and

water model Knowledge, Science and Technology

(KST) in scenario modeling


IAASTD: Overarching QuestionIAASTD: Overarching Question

“How to reduce hunger and poverty, improve rural livelihoods, and facilitate equitable, environmentally, socially and economically sustainable development through access to, and use of agricultural knowledge, science and technology”?


IAASTD: Four Broad QuestionsIAASTD: Four Broad Questions

What are the challenges that can be addressed through agricultural KST?

What are the likely positive and negative consequences of agricultural KST?

What are the enabling conditions required to optimize the uptake and diffusion of agricultural KST?

What investments are needed to help realize the potential of agricultural KST?


IAASTD CharacteristicsIAASTD Characteristics

Structural features: Intergovernmental process, with a multi-stakeholder Bureau Co-sponsored by seven international agencies – FAO, GEF,

UNDP, UNEP, UNESCO, World Bank, and WHO Based on an international consultative process and well-

defined user needs Prepared and peer-reviewed by hundreds of experts from all

stakeholder groups

Substance features Multi-thematic (nutritional security, livelihoods, human

health, environmental sustainability) Multi-spatial using a consistent framework Multi-temporal (now to 2050) employing plausible futures Integrates indigenous and institutional knowledge Assesses scientific knowledge and the effectiveness of

institutions and policies

IAASTD Conceptual FrameworkIAASTD Conceptual FrameworkHuman Impacts on:•Incomes and employment

•Hunger•Human health

•Resilience and vulnerability•Social and Gender Equality•Economic diversification

•Rural livelihoods•Quality of natural environment

•Social Stability

Indirect change driversEconomic

•Demographic (urbanization, migration)•Socio-political (policies and institutions)

•Cultural and ethical (values)•Global KST

Agricultural KST•New knowledge (including policies)

•New technologies (biological and non-biological)•Harnessing/Maintenance/adaptation

of indigenous knowledge•Effective knowledge exchange systems

•KST system responsiveness & adaptability•KST system accountability

Direct change drivers•Biodiversity loss

•Volume and pattern of demand•Consumption patterns•Labor availability

•Land and water availability•Agricultural policy and regulatory

environment•GHG emissions and Climate change

•Farmers decisions

Agricultural goods and Services•Food production•Fiber, oils, material•Biomass/energy•Medicines

•Landscape and environmental management

•Carbon sequestration•Agro-ecosystem function


What are Scenarios and Why Use Them? What are Scenarios and Why Use Them?

Scenarios are stories about the future with a logical plot and narrative governing the manner in which events unfold

Purpose of scenarios:• Information dissemination• Scientific exploration• Decision-making tool

Types of scenarios• Exploratory vs. anticipatory scenarios• Baseline vs. policy scenarios• Qualitative vs. quantitative scenarios, or a

combination


IAASTD Approach to ScenariosIAASTD Approach to Scenarios

Structured accounts of possible futures Describe futures that could be, rather than futures that will be Alternative, dynamic stories that capture key ingredients of

our uncertainty about the future of our study system Constructed to provide insight into drivers of change, reveal

the implications of current trajectories, and illuminate options for action

Encompass quantitative models and realistic projections, but much of their value lies in incorporating both qualitative and quantitative understandings of the system and in forcing people to evaluate and reassess their beliefs and assumptions about the system

What are the consequences of plausible changes in development paths for hunger, poverty alleviation, human health, and the environment?


Scenario Development Process for Scenario Development Process for IAASTDIAASTD Procedure builds from MA approach and

Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) methodology

Integrates qualitative and quantitative scenarios• Qualitative – understandable way to

communicate complex information, considerable depth, comprehensive feedback effects and incorporate a wide range of views about the future

• Quantitative – check the consistency of qualitative scenarios, provide relevant numerical information and “enrich” qualitative scenarios by trends and dynamics


Scenario Development FrameworkScenario Development Framework

Two essential activities• Formulation of alternative scenario

storylines – facilitates internal consistency of different

assumptions

– takes into account broad range of elements and feedback effects

• Quantification– helps provide insights into those

processes where sufficient knowledge exists to allow modeling

– takes into account interactions among various drivers and services


Phase I: Organizational steps

1. Establish a scenario team.

2. Establish a scenario panel.

3. Conduct interviews and workshops with scenario end users (broad stakeholder consultation).

4. Determine the objectives and focus of the scenarios.

5. Clarify the focal questions of the scenarios.

Proposed IAASTD Procedure for Developing Proposed IAASTD Procedure for Developing Scenarios – Three PhasesScenarios – Three Phases


Phase II: Scenario writing and quantification

1. Construct a zero-order draft of scenario storylines.

2. Organize modeling analyses and begin quantification.

3. Revise zero-order storylines and construct first-order storylines

4. Quantify scenarios.5. Augment/revise storylines based on results of

quantifications.6. Derive new driving forces and re-run the

models.



Phase III: Synthesis, review and dissemination

1.Distribute draft scenarios for general review.

2.Develop final version of the scenarios.

3.Publish and disseminate the scenarios.



Drivers and OutputsDrivers and Outputs

Population development – total population and age distribution in different regions

Economic development – assumed growth of GDP per region and changes in economic structure

Technology development – covers many model inputs such as rate of improvement in the efficiency of domestic water use, or the rate of increase in crop yields

Demand—dietary preferences and dynamics of change Human behavior –willingness of people to invest time or

money in energy conservation or water conservation Institutional factors – existence and strength of local,

national, and global institutions to promote education, international trade and international technology transfer• International technology transfer – represented directly

(e.g. trade barriers, import tariffs) or indirectly (e.g. income elasticity for education)


Four Forward-looking ScenariosFour Forward-looking Scenarios

globalized fragmented

Environmentally reactive

Environmentally pro-active

AdaptingMosaic

Order from Strength

TechnoGarden

Global Orchestration


Global OrchestrationGlobal Orchestration

Dominant Approach for Sustainability

Economic Approach

Social Policy Foci

Create demand for environmental protection via economic growth and social improvements; public goods

Redefinition of the public and private sector roles; improving market performance; trade liberalization; focus on global public good

Increase global equity; public health; global education

Focus on macro-scale policy reform for environmental sustainability


Order from StrengthOrder from Strength


Economic Approach

Social Policy Foci

Reactive problem-solving by individual nations; sectoral approaches, creation of parks and protected reserves

Regional trade blocs, mercantilism, self-sufficiency

Security and protection

Retreat from global institutions, focus on national regulation and protectionism


Adapting MosaicAdapting Mosaic


Economic Approach

Social Policy Foci

Learning via management and monitoring, shared management responsibility, adjustment of governance structures to resource users, common-property institutions

Focus on local development; trade rules allow local flexibility/interpretation; local non-market rights

Local communities linked to global communities; local equity

Retreat from global institutions, focus on strengthened local institutions and local learning


Techno GardenTechno Garden


Economic Approach

Social Policy Foci

Green technology, eco-efficiency, tradeable ecological property rights

Global reduction of tariff boundaries, fairly free movement of goods, capital and people, global markets in ecological property

Improving individual and community technical expertise; policies follow opportunities; competition

Emphasis on development of technologies to substitute for ecosystem services

Modeling to Quantify Parts of Modeling to Quantify Parts of the MA scenariosthe MA scenarios

Storylines

Global Orchestration, Techno Garden, etc.

IMPACTWorld food production

IMAGE 2 Global change

WaterGAPWorld water

resources

Model Inputs

Demographic Economic Technological

AIM Global change

Model Outputs

Provisioning Services - Food (meat, fish, grain production)- Fiber (timber)- Freshwater (renewable water resources & withdrawals)- Fuel wood (biofuels)

Regulating - Climate regulation (C flux) - Air quality (NOx, S emissions)

Supporting primary production

Population GrowthPopulation GrowthPopulation in Millions

Region Global Orchestration Techno Garden Adapting Mosaic Order from Strength

1995 2020 2050 2100 2020 2050 2100 2020 2050 2100 2020 2050 2100

Former Soviet Union

285 290 282 245 292 281 252 288 273 246 287 257 216

Latin America 477 637 742 681 672 831 950 708 933 1,155 710 944 1,309

Middle East/North Africa

312 478 603 597 509 692 788 537 765 924 539 774 972

OECD1,020 1,136 1,255 1,153 1,117 1,154 1,077 1,079 1,068 978 1,076 998 856

Asia3,049 3,861 4,104 3,006 4,039 4,535 3,992 4,201 4,992 4,753 4,210 5,023 5,173

Sub-Saharan Africa

558 858 1,109 1,132 907 1,329 1,516 951 1,492 1,775 956 1,570 1,988

World5,701 7,260 8,095 6,814 7,537 8,821 8,575 7,764 9,522 9,830 7,777 9,567 10,514

Income Growth (GDP/cap/year)Income Growth (GDP/cap/year)

Economic Growth Rates (percent per year)

Region Historic Global Orchestration Techno Garden Adapting Mosaic Order from Strength

1971-2000

1995-2020

2020-2050

2050-2100

1995-2020

2020-2050

2050-2100

1995-2020

2020-2050

2050-2100

1995-2020

2020-2050

2050-2100

Former Soviet Union

0.4 3.50 4.91 3.14 2.94 4.49 3.14 2.60 4.03 3.08 2.24 2.64 2.72

Latin America 1.2 2.80 4.28 2.24 2.36 3.93 2.24 2.06 2.99 2.23 1.78 2.29 1.77

Middle East/North Africa

0.7 1.96 3.42 2.50 1.74 3.27 2.50 1.61 2.43 2.40 1.51 1.75 1.93

OECD2.1 2.45 1.93 1.34 2.22 1.74 1.35 2.00 1.56 1.19 2.06 1.31 0.86

Asia5.0 5.06 5.28 3.08 4.24 4.70 3.13 3.76 4.12 2.52 3.22 2.43 2.07

Sub-Saharan Africa

-0.4 1.69 3.97 4.08 1.44 3.80 4.08 1.21 2.85 3.31 1.02 2.12 2.16

World1.4 2.38 3.00 2.26 1.90 2.46 2.25 1.46 1.91 1.88 1.39 1.04 1.26


Sample Qualitative Scenarios for IAASTDSample Qualitative Scenarios for IAASTD

Intensive agriculture – emphasis on• Intensive agriculture• Economic growth• Public goods

Low input agriculture• Low-input agricultural technology

Adaptive ecosystem targeting• Agricultural science and technology targeted to

ecosystems• Indigenous technology and participatory breeding

Rates of change in dietary preferences• Convergence to Western diets, decline in Western

meat demand, acceptance of biofortication


KSTKST within a Policy Modeling Framework within a Policy Modeling Framework

“K” - different from “S” and “T” - latent and not easily measured

KST - hard to separate due to obvious feedbacks

Observing “S” & “T”• in cross-section can be used to

construct a “possibility frontier” – additional models

• observe over time to identify trends and underlying drivers


How to Account for KnowledgeHow to Account for Knowledge

Knowledge - embodied in • education (for the general population) • agricultural extension• Indigenous knowledge

Agricultural extension - has direct effects on crop productivity and yields

Education – • enhance overall labor productivity (not

only in agriculture)• positive effects in nutrition outcomes

(through malnutrition work)


Should we Endogenize Science and Should we Endogenize Science and Technology ?Technology ?

Keeping ST exogenous - allows one to look at clear counter-factual comparisons and scenarios

Endogenizing ST – may restrict the range of investment scenarios that can be examined

Not clear if necessary length of data over time is available to properly specify an endogenous relationship for Science and Technology


Science and Technology in Science and Technology in ScenariosScenarios

Changes in rainfed and irrigated area growth for crops

Changes in rainfed and irrigated yield growth for crops

Changes in numbers and yield growth for livestock

Changes in production growth for 4 types of fisheries commodities (high value vs. low value)

SUPPLY SIDE



Changes in dietary preferences over time (leading to changes in kilocalorie composition) – disaggregation to the potential impact of micronutrient breeding

DEMAND SIDE



Estimation of the impact of • biosafety and biotechnology

regulations and phyto-sanitary restrictions

• changes in supply and demand on child malnutrition

• crop yields from climate change Subsidies, taxes, tariffs and other trade

restrictions

ALSO


Spatially Disaggregating Spatially Disaggregating

Impact of KST-related investments on productivity growth, can be better captured with the following disaggregations:

Greater spatial resolution for production of food and water allocations

Disaggregation of crop categories to explicitly model dryland crops

Differentiation between high and low-input rain-fed agriculture

Disaggregation among GMO and non-GMO options


The Education-Nutrition The Education-Nutrition Relationship in IMPACT-WATERRelationship in IMPACT-WATER

Malnourished children are projected as follows:– %MALt= - 25.24 * ln (PCKCALt) - 71.76 LFEXPRATt– - 0.22 SCHt - 0.08 WATERt

NMALt = %MALt x POP5t

%MAL = Percent of malnourished children PCKCAL = Per capita calorie consumption SCH = Total female enrollment in secondary education as

a % of the female age-group LFEXPRAT = Ratio of female to male life exp. at birth WATER = Percent of people with access to clean

water NMAL = Number of malnourished children, and POP5 = Number of children 0 to 5 years old


How to Account for InvestmentsHow to Account for Investments

Current model framework examines the impact of investments made in

• Roads

• Irrigation

• Schools

• Safe water

• Agricultural technology Can further disaggregate agricultural technology

investments to account for GMO and non-GMO technologies, drought/salt tolerant variety breeding, etc.

scenario development for international assessment of agricultural science and technology for...

Documents

agricultural knowledge

technology kst

diffusion of agricultural

potential of agricultural

scenario development

international agencies

development iaastdmark

sustainable development