Results from the Strategic Assessment of International Rice Research Priorities: comparing the...

7/28/2019 Results from the Strategic Assessment of International Rice Research Priorities: comparing the potential of rice technologies to make a difference for the poor, the food insecur

1/41

Results from the Strategic Assessment ofInternational Rice Research Priorities:

comparing the potential of rice technologiesto make a difference for the poor, the food

insecure and the environment in Asia

David A. Raitzer, IRRI Strategic Planning and Impact Assessment Specialist

On behalf of IRRI Strategic Assessment Taskforce and IRRI colleagues


2/41

Key unresolved questions

Does IRRIs greatest potential to benefit the poor

Rest in irrigated or rainfed environments?

Arise in South Asia or Southeast Asia?

Stem from genetic improvement or enhanced management?

Result from upstream science or downstream adaptationand delivery?

Approach: compile and integrate state of the artunderstanding, data and tools


3/41

Goals

Key intended findings impact potential:

estimates of economic, poverty, food security and environmentalbenefits in developing Asian rice producing countries in differentpotential international research areas through 2035

Evidence based, inclusive scientist-participatory approachdrawing tools and expertise from multiple disciplines

Better appreciation of

Our (often unstated) assumptions

The magnitude and distribution of target constraints

Tradeoffs in the achievement of mission levels goals

Modular approach that can be updated when new informationbecomes available to support learning


4/41

Approach & stages1. Background

analysis (baselinescenarios, etc.)

2. Analysis of dataon problem

prevalence

3. Characterizationof scientificsolutions

(assumptions,timeframes,

effectiveness)

4. Estimation ofoutcomes and effects

at scale (adoption,productivity, supply)

5. Partialequilibriummodeling

Output:Expectedimpacts

quantified


5/41

Stage1. Background analyses

Understanding the adoption context now Definition of new rice agro-ecologies

Quantification of baseline input use and production costs

Understanding the implications of mega-trends

Projection of future spatial distribution of rice production

Projection of attainable yields, actual yields and yield gaps

Projection of consumption and self consumption

Projection of wages and labor use Projection of spatial distribution of poverty

Projection of caloric insufficiency and associated disease burden


6/41

1 - IR 2 - IR / other 3 - IR / IR 4 - IR / IR / other 5 - RF 6 - RF / RF 7 - RF / RF other 8 - RF Dry/Upland

New rice agro-ecologies for Asia (ca. 2005)


7/41

Projected change in harvested area 2012-2035 (ARIMA, proportion)


8/41

Yield gap projections

Defines additive scope for most technologies other than

yield potential Yield modeled for irrigated (potential) and rainfed

(rainfall constrained) areas of Asia under A1B IPCCclimate scenario to 2035

PRECIS downscaling of Hadley GCM, daily data

ORYZA2000 crop growth model

Actual yield is based on adjusted ARIMA forecasts:

Adjusted to remove IRRI genetic improvement contribution(0.4% average annual growth, pro-rated according to yield

growth) Adjusted to reflect parallel shift to changes in yield potential

caused by climate change for each spatial unit

Gap = attainable yield actual yield


9/41

Yield gaps in2035 (no

IRRI)

Average gaps -2035 (t/ha)

Irrigated Rainfed

South Asia 2.58 1.29

SoutheastAsia 2.09 0.93

East Asia 1.54 1.15


10/41

ARIMA projections of annual per capita rice consumption (kg)[multiplied by population projections for total consumption]

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

180

200

1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035

1 Bangladesh

2 Cambodia

3 China

4 North Korea

5 India

6 Indonesia

7 Laos

8 Malaysia

9 Myanmar

10 Nepal

11 Pakistan

12 Philippines

13 Sri Lanka

14 Thailand

15 East Timor

16 Vietnam


11/41

Projected 2035 baseline spatial distribution of PPP$2/day poverty

or no data


12/41

Stage 2: Interdisciplinary working groups

Define key problem/opportunities within category For each, characterize distribution, magnitude and

frequency of problem by geography

Draws on remote sensing (drought, salinity in SouthAsia), national data (submergence & drought),climate data (heat, cold), soil maps (problem soils),RICPEST outputs (biotic syndromes), national dataon damages


13/41

Example of constraintcharacterization process - biotic

Detailed loss surveys of456 farms in 6

Production Situations

RICEPEST and Epiricemodeling

Data collected by3000 Indonesian stafffor 22 years on ricedamage, reconciled

to AEs

Expertknowledge

Results of on farmexperiments in 6

Production Situations

Estimates


14/41


15/41

Example of constraint characterization output average areaaffected by flooding (proportion harvested area)


16/41

Stage 3: Scientist assessment of scientific solutions Unit of analysis is constraint by technology (i.e. drought tolerance QTLs)

For each solution appraise: Investment required (IRRI + partners)

Years of research to product

Probability of success, key factors affecting success

Alternative suppliers Course of research progress without international effort

For each solution in each ecology and subregion

Likely adoption profiles

Expected on farm costs and benefits of adoption by operation Expected on farm environmental effects

Delivery and extension requirements

63 solutions * 31 spatial units * 23 parameters = 45000 scientist estimates!


17/41

Adoption

Expected adoption is elicited by season, ecology and subregionas a product of several variables

Probability of success

Percentage of season/ecology/subregion relevant to solution(e.g. portion with problem that solution addresses)

Expected adoption within relevant portion ofseason/ecology/subregion in 2020 (near term products) and

2035 (all), considering :


18/41

Stage 4: Modeling - logistic diffusion

Adoption over time is modeled against a symmetric logisticdiffusion curve by solving for the inflection point usingprovided points on the curve by season/ecology/subregion

International researchattributable adoptionidentified viadifference betweenadoption curve and

delayed availability


19/41

Estimation of shifts in production costs and output

Data from 20 household surveys

used to estimate input and laboruse by operation

For each agro-ecology &season

In each major Asian country

Each relative change is multipliedagainst each current average cost

Gives conditional percentage effecton cost and output by season,ecology and subregion for adopters

Subset of IRRI household surveydatabase


20/41

Calculating output and cost shifts over timeand space

Agroecological cost and output shifts are interpolated over timeaccording to the diffusion curve for eachseason/agroecology/subregion

Each of those shifts is interpolated to 210 Asian provinces

based on production in each season and ecology

National/subnational adjustments are performed as necessary

Constraints that vary geographically

Policy barriers (e.g. transgenic approval)

Supply shocks are used to model price effects, with adjustmentof price responses to reflect effects of trade


21/41

Economic surplus framework Each price effect is used with a proportionally shifted

supply function to calculate producer surplus bysolution, spatial unit and year under two functionalforms

2 functional forms Constant elasticity

Observed elasticity near the equilibrium and a

positive shutdown price Consumer surplus estimated nationally

consumer benefits are reallocated to producers on self-consumed output


22/41

Constant elasticity pivotal shift framework

A

BC

E

F


23/41

Supply curve with positive shut down price andobserved elasticities near the initial equilibrium


24/41

Poverty

Poor producers benefits approximated as producersurplus * the poverty rate in the unit-year * averagepoor rice area/average rice area.

The effect on poor consumers is calculated based on

their share of consumption and consumer surplus.

Using income-disaggregated expenditure data onrice from national income and expenditure surveys

With projected poverty rates and gaps


25/41

Effects on hired labor Each technology has quantified effects on hired

labor demand, under projected labor market

baseline equilibria

Modeled as a proportional shift in a demand foreach geographic unit in each year for eachtechnology.

This is translated into equilibrium price (wage)effects.

Effects on labor suppliers are modeled as theproducer surplus changes resulting from

changes in the wage. Effects on poverty are quantified assuming that

the poverty rate for unskilled agricultural labor istwice the prevailing poverty rate in the area and

year


26/41

Hunger

Historical trends in the national proportionof hungry , population and average caloricgaps for the hungry are used to projectfuture hunger.

Absolute trends in hunger and caloric gaps

are used to project WHO hunger risk factorassociated Disability Affected Life Years(DALYs)

Increases in consumption by the deficientpopulation from reductions in equilibrium

price are used to estimate reductions inDALYs


27/41

Incorporating environmental impacts

Area responses to the price effects are estimated Translated into forest cover effects using land use data

Translated in greenhouse gas emission effects

Translated into reductions in water use

Translated into reductions in methane emissions

Direct environmental effects are calculated

Water use reduction based on adoption, soil texture class,ET and rainfall

Methane reductions based on IPCC coefficients


28/41

Modeling impact

Some facts about the model 300,000 estimates per indicator (e.g.

adoption, producer surplus)

>15 million cells

6 gigs of RAM

Can be run historically or for the future Can be updated easily with new

information


29/41

Overall results

Gains do not exceed yield gaps

Total new technology attributable increases in Asianproduction by 2035: 6.3% 10%

Total international research attributable increases inAsian rice production by 2035: 3.9% 6.3%

Gains consistent with research contributions assessed

historically in Asia

Aggregate impact potential (2005 PPP$ discounted at 5%) low


30/41

Aggregate impact potential (2005 PPP$, discounted at 5%), lowattributable scenario 2013-2035


31/41

Total technology impacts from 2013 to 2035 constant elasticityform in low scenario (values in billions of discounted [5%] 2005 PPP$,

DALYs in millions)

Host plant

resistance

Abiotic stress

tolerance Inbred yield C4 rice

Hyrbrid

rice

Other

traits Management Mechanization

Total 3.27 9.94 5.85 1.73 2.32 1.54 6.88 1.82

Consumers 2.21 7.19 4.39 1.20 1.68 1.22 5.86 8.29

Producers 0.78 1.64 0.77 0.38 0.31 0.39 1.79 3.19

Hired labor 0.28 1.12 0.69 0.15 0.32 -0.07 -0.78 -9.66

Poor consumers

(PPP2/day) 0.59 2.56 1.29 0.32 0.58 0.33 1.75 2.21

Poor producers

(PPP2/day) 0.19 0.84 0.28 0.10 0.12 0.11 0.35 0.23

Poor hired labor

(PPP2/day) 0.15 0.72 0.35 0.08 0.16 -0.04 -0.46 -4.46

Total poor (PPP2/day) 0.92 4.13 1.91 0.50 0.87 0.40 1.64 -2.02

DALYs reduced 0.91 4.29 2.51 0.72 1.24 0.63 2.96 3.82

GHG & water 0.04 0.13 0.07 0.02 0.03 0.02 1.15 0.15

Germplasm Management related


32/41

Total technology impacts from 2013 to 2035constantelasticity with positive shutdown price in low scenario

(values in billions of discounted [5%] 2005 PPP$, DALYs in millions)

Host plant

resistance

Abiotic stress


Hyrbrid

rice

Other


Total 5.75 17.46 9.10 2.23 3.49 2.57 13.91 10.38

Consumers 2.06 6.74 3.63 0.86 1.44 1.05 5.44 7.77

Producers 3.36 9.48 4.71 1.20 1.70 1.57 8.08 12.11

Hired labor 0.28 1.12 0.69 0.15 0.32 -0.07 -0.78 -9.66

Poor consumers

(PPP2/day) 0.55 2.42 1.07 0.51 0.27 0.28 1.63 2.09

Poor producers

(PPP2/day) 0.77 3.52 1.36 0.31 0.54 0.37 1.89 1.95

Poor hired labor(PPP2/day) 0.15 0.72 0.35 0.08 0.16 -0.04 -0.46 -4.46


DALYs reduced 0.83 3.96 2.05 0.51 1.04 0.53 2.68 3.52

GHG & water 0.04 0.13 0.07 0.02 0.03 0.02 1.15 0.15



33/41

Potential international research impacts from 2013 to 2035constant elasticity with positive shutdown price in low scenario

(values in billions of discounted [5%] 2005 PPP$, DALYs in millions)

Host plant

resistance

Abiotic stress


Hyrbrid

rice

Other


Total 3.59 12.20 8.93 2.23 2.47 2.38 7.84 7.58

Consumers 1.32 4.64 3.57 0.86 1.03 0.97 2.80 5.61

Producers 2.06 6.71 4.62 1.20 1.20 1.46 4.15 8.98

Hired labor 0.18 0.76 0.68 0.15 0.23 -0.07 -0.22 -7.12

Poor consumers

(PPP2/day) 0.37 1.68 1.05 0.36 0.25 0.26 0.85 1.48

Poor producers

(PPP2/day) 0.51 2.46 1.33 0.31 0.39 0.35 1.03 1.48Poor hired labor

(PPP2/day) 0.10 0.49 0.34 0.08 0.11 -0.04 -0.14 -3.31


DALYs reduced 0.52 2.45 2.01 0.51 0.72 0.49 1.23 2.16

GHG & water0.03 0.09 0.06 0.02 0.02 0.02 1.11 0.11


T 15 i di id l i t ti l i h l ti


34/41

Top 15 individual international rice research solutions (lowscenario, positive shutdown price, 2013-2035 surplus effects in million 2005

PPP$ discounted [5%])

Total

benefits

Total

benefits to

1.25 poor(including

labor)

Total benefits

to 2 poor(including

labor)DALYs

reducedGHG &

waterVarieties with increased attainable

yield 5942.42 751.01 1863.89 1.38 43.62

Mechanically transplanted

puddled price 5032.62 3.92 111.36 1.73 64.09

Inbred yield potential 2989.70 337.50 860.67 0.63 20.99

Submergent tolerant varieties 2575.14 425.03 927.74 0.49 18.09

Combine harvesters 2549.77 -199.50 -472.33 0.44 44.72

Hybrid yield potential 2474.87 356.56 862.20 0.72 17.94

Introgression of major drought

QTLs 2447.50 520.51 1126.48 0.65 19.20

SSNM for NPK 2314.69 244.10 604.40 0.34 16.84

C4 rice 2229.92 242.62 619.24 0.51 17.14

Salt tolerant varieties for coastalareas 2211.13 391.32 867.94 0.39 12.81

Tolerant varieties for saline and

alkaline inland soils 2012.98 328.99 741.85 0.40 11.68

Safe AWD 1435.61 87.01 186.85 0.06 979.11

Heat tolerant rice 1390.06 102.43 257.46 0.13 7.34

Blast HPR 1315.71 184.86 420.14 0.20 9.31

Conventional drought tolerance1232.62 257.44 548.29 0.28 9.58


35/41

Results by ecology & subregion totalbenefits (2005 PPP$ billions)


36/41

Results by ecology & subregion benefitsto the PPP$2 poor(2005 PPP$ billions)


37/41

Results by

upstream/downstream


38/41

Implications Suggests emphasis on applied & upstream research

Suggests many common technologies to irrigatedand rainfed environments and continued importanceof irrigated technologies

Reinforces emphasis on abiotic stress tolerance

Reinforces emphasis on South Asia

Suggests additional emphasis on increasing

attainable yield Exposes mechanization tradeoffs regarding efficiency

and equity goals


39/41

Reflections Longer to compile the underlying data than expected

Limitations of scientist knowledge beyond project sites

There are known knowns; there are things we know

we know.

We also know there are known unknowns; that is tosay, we know there are some things we do not know.

But there are also unknown unknowns the ones

we dont know we dont know.

Former United States Secretary of Defense,Donald Rumsfeld (on WMDs in Iraq)

C l i


40/41

Conclusions

Synthesizes best currently available information into theories of

change - hypotheses to be tested further

Learned what we needed to know

Illustrates potential of a multi-disciplinary, evidence-based approachto defining outcomes and impacts

Confirms many existing choices (emphasis on abiotic tolerance,focus on South Asia)

Exposes many clear tradeoffs

Can be updated with new information, so offers potential forevaluation follow up for learning


41/41

With special thanks to all whocontributed!Extensive support was provided by :

Andy Nelson & GIS

Rio MaligaligZeny Huelgas

Strategic Assessment Taskforce Members

Reactions and feedback are welcome

Can still be incorporated!

Results from the Strategic Assessment of International Rice Research Priorities: comparing the...

Documents

Transcript of Results from the Strategic Assessment of International Rice Research Priorities: comparing the...