IAAE Symposium on Improving Returns to Agricultural Research in Sub-Saharan AfricaFoz do Iguaçu | 20 August 2012

Theme 4: An Evolving Organizational Architecture for African R&D

John Lynam

African R&D: The Small Country Problem

Economies with an agrarian structure Characterized by low research capacity and vulnerability

to funding volatility 8 of the larger countries have driven recent growth in the

performance of agricultural research, accounting for two-thirds of investment and capacity during the 2001–08 period.

For the remaining countries—most invest less than $25 million PPP dollars per year and employ fewer than 300 FTE researchers each.

Lack of economies of scale and scope in agricultural R&D

Source: Flaherty et al. 2011

Comparison of research systems

Sub-Saharan

Africa Brazil China India United States

Indicators 2008 2006 2007 2003 2008 Arable and permanent crop area (million hectares) 205 69 122 170 166 Population (million) 821 188 1,317 1,064 304 Agricultural labor force (million) 186 12 505 249 3 Agricultural GDP (billion 2005 PPP dollars) 285,567 72,735 743,538 396,585 151,928 Number of public agricultural research agenciesa 353 130 1,105 131 51 Number of public agricultural researchers (FTEs) 12,120 5,376 70,000 13,089 9,965 Share of researchers with a PhD degree (percent)b 30 75 <30 55 100 Annual public spending on agricultural R&D (million 2005 PPP dollars) 1,741 1,307 3,626 1,426 4,825

The Theory in Organizing Regional Research

There are scale economies to be had from regional cooperation given many small countries (& many that are landlocked)

Given similar resource endowments and constraints, investments in one country have the potential to generate externalities (spillovers) in neighboring countries, and

Many applied research themes extend beyond national boundaries

Diverse economies in the region offer great potential to spur growth through greater trade linkages

CGIAR All 15 CGIAR centers have activities in SSA, four of them have their hq in SSA. Nowadays, half of the CGIAR budget is spent on SSA.

FARA Established in 2001 with the SROs as the founding members. FARA took over from SPAAR, which operated under World Bank auspices between 1987 and 2001.

ASARECA Established in 1992.

CARDESA Established in 2011, but preceded by SADC-FANR (2001-2011) and SACCAR (1984-2001).

CORAF Established in 1987. Initially only covering French-speaking countries. Since 1995, however, membership also open to English and Portuguese speaking countries in West Africa.

NARS Some 48 – varying very strongly in size and strength

Building Blocks of the Regional Architecture

Expenditure on Agricultural Research

Research Organization 2010 Expenditure(Million US Dollars)

NARS 1,700

CGIAR 336

FARA 20

ASARECA 15

CORAF 9

Source: Roseboom 2011

The Reality in Organizing Regional Research

Well functioning NARI’s critical to generating spillovers and adapting spill ins

Testing networks and functional institutional linkages necessary for organizing and targeting regional research spillovers

Financing is essential for regional research A degree of sub-regional, NARI specialization required to

generate benefits from regional research History of national governments investing in regional

research is limited by free rider problem, eg WARDA

A Vision for Regional Agricultural R&D

A functional division of labor at international and national level (research capacity at SRO level?)

Sub-regional research networks provide a platform for adaptation and targeting of research outputs

Efficient adaptive research system linked to private sector and civil society innovation capacity

Commitments of national governments to sustainable funding of effective research capacity

The CAADP process provides a framework for donor funding of agricultural R&D

Three Approaches to Regional Research

Prior to 2007, SRO’s coordinating CGIAR research networks

-- Commodity-based sub-regional networks fostered division of labor and capacity for spill ins

Post-2007, SRO’s programmatic structure organized around competitive grants

-- Competitive grants do not address capacity constraints nor sub-regional division of labor

World Bank regional EAAPP/WAAPP funding to “centers of excellence”

-- Mandated “centers of excellence” have a checkered history and sustainability of funding a question mark

NARI Capacity and Differentiation

Effective and differentiated NARI capacity is essential for regional approaches

Differences in country investment leading to 8 large national systems and “the rest”

Large countries more successful in competitive grant programs and as centers of excellence

Large donors, eg USAID, BMGF, AGRA, have specific country priorities, mostly large countries

Still minimal capacity to organize spill ins to smaller countries

The CGIAR and Regional Strategies

Closing of regional research networks, CGIAR reform process in 2008, and focus on other partners than NARI’s has weakened international-national research links

Reform based on 15 CGIAR Research Programs (CRPs) which are global and no defined regional strategy for SSA

Shift in focus to production systems within benchmark sites may provide basis for new NARI linkages

Performance monitoring based on intermediate development objectives may shift focus to downstream development partners rather than NARI’s

An efficient system to facilitate sub-regional spill ins is still lacking

Global Public and Private Agricultural R&D, 2000 Investments, 2000

Region Expenditure(Million US $)

Percent Public Expenditure

Asia-Pacific 8,186 91.9

Latin America 2,578 95.2

Sub-Saharan Africa 1,486 98.3

Developing Country Sub-Total 13,682 93.7

High Income Countries 22,277 64.0

Source: Pardey, et al, 2006

– Seed industry about 40% of R&D– Processing industry 30% of R&D

Private R&D Expenditures SSA, South Asia

Measures Kenya Senegal South Africa

Tanzania Zambia Bangla-desh

India

Private R&D (In 2008 Mill.US$)

1.6 -3.2 3.6-4.7 41.0 – 50

0.9 -1.8 1.3-2.5 10-20 251.0

Private R&D as % of Ag GDP

0.25-0.05

0.18-0.24

0.49-0.60

0.015-0.03

0.05-0.09

0.07-0.13

0.12

# of Scientists 12 61 201 32 25 119 2190

13Source: Pray et al. 2011

Towards a Regional Research System

Differentiated but effective NARI capacity is essential for a sub-regional research system

With CAADP, the CGIAR reform, and increasing donor investment in agriculture there is a window of institutional flexibility in designing such a system

An increasing private sector role will partly depend on the development of sub-regional markets

A sub-regional research system still depends on donor funding and needs to be matched by national government commitment to funding NARI capacity

As in the colonial period, eg EAAFRO, some sub-regional research capacity is needed (SRO’s or CGIAR)

THANK YOU