RTB Priority assessment

First World Congress on Root and Tuber Crops Nanning, Guangxi, China

22nd January, 2016

Task Force Bioversity: Diemuth Pemsl, Charles Staver CIAT: Bernardo Creamer, Glenn Hyman CIP: Guy Hareau, Ulrich Kleinwechter IITA: Tahirou Abdoulaye, Arega Alene, Joseph Rusike, Holger Kirscht RTB: Graham Thiele

Outline of presentation

• Introduction Overview of six steps methodology

• Process and main results – Defining priority options – Economic surplus estimates

• Discussion – Stakeholder feedback

• Conclusions and lessons leant

Why strategic assessment of RTB priorities?

• Five crops: cassava, potatoes, sweetpotatoes, bananas and plantains, yams •Five Centers: CIP, CIAT, IITA, Bioversity + CIRAD •Limited resources for research

What are the best alternatives to invest resources to achieve highest impacts through research?

Common methodology: six steps

Process and main results

Expert survey to identify key constraints

• Structured questionnaire with major constraints for each crop.

• Took place in regional meetings relevant to each crop or online through personal invitations and individualized links – Banana: Kampala workshop with 45 ARI and national banana

scientists to select research options and initial parameters

• Kicked off in last GCP21 meeting in Uganda! .

Overview of expert survey final sample disaggregated by region and crop

SSA LAC Asia Others Global Total per crop

Cassava 200 32 35 8 40 315

Potatoes 59 127 170 18 37 411

Sweet potatoes 68 27 90 4 27 216

Bananas & Plantains 184 176 125 4 34 523

Yams 176 6 7 6 21 216

Total per region 687 368 427 40 159 1,681

Option scoring: results

Global LAC SSA Asia/P

Improving shelf life of cassava roots 4.24 4.28 4.10 4.11

Improving production and distribution of elite planting materials

4.24 4.18 4.16 3.79

Cassava Mosaic disease(Disease management)

4.24 3.89 4.29 3.73

Developing cassava products for industrial applications (flour and starch)

4.18 4.36 4.04 4.10

Cassava: top 4 research options by crop

Global LAC SSA Asia/P

Late blight control and management 4.71 4.63 4.77 4.77

Breeding for late blight resistance 4.60 4.56 4.52 4.66

Breeding for drought tolerance / water use efficiency

4.51 4.56 4.34 4.62

Breeding for earliness 4.49 4.48 4.66 4.52

Potatoes: top 4 research options

Global LAC SSA Asia/P

Improving the quality of planting material (e.g., elimination of diseases)

4.35 4.29 4.71 4.15

Pro-vitamin A (beta-carotene) (breeding)

4.28 4.21 4.70 4.02

Breeding for high yield 4.26 4.21 4.61 4.10

Improving production and distribution of elite planting materials (formal seed systems)

4.21 4.21 4.46 4.08

Sweetpotatoes - top 4 research options

Global LAC SSA Asia/P

Improving shelf life of yam tubers 4.30 4.50 4.47 n.d.

Improving soil fertility)(micro-nutrients, fertilizer, organic matter)

4.17 4.17 3.98 n.d.

Improving small scale processing of yam for human consumption

4.13 3.80 4.23 n.d.

Improving technologies for farmer based production and distribution of planting materials(informal)

4.10 4.50 4.13 n.d.

Yam: top 4 research options

Global LAC SSA Asia/P Breeding for high yield 4.21 4.14 4.40 4.05

Management of fungal leaf disease (excl. resistant varieties)

4.11 4.40 3.88 3.85

Breeding for resistance to fungal leaf diseases

4.11 4.45 3.82 3.85

Strategies to improve soil fertility (micro-nutrients and fertilizer)

4.08 4.18 4.18 3.82

Bananas: top 4 research options

Economic surplus estimates

Economic surplus model and poverty effect 31 research options: Banana - 6; Cassava - 10; Potato - 6; Sweetpotato - 4, Yams - 5

– Data base of parameters (country and technology specific)

– Positive net present values (NPVs) all options – IRRs of assessed options indicate considerable

poverty reduction

Technology

Duration of Research (years)

Years to Maximum Adoption

(lag years)

No. of Countries Targeted

Total Annual R&D Costs (US

$'000)

Dissemination Costs (US $/ha)

OFSP 1-2 10 23 24,000 50

SPVD-resistant varieties

1 (Angola:5) 5-10 23 4,000 50

Sweetpotato seed system

1 10 24 4,000 80

Weevil-resistant varieties

5 10 23 4,000 50

Sweetpotato results: adoption ceiling & benefits

Technology

Low Adopt. (M ha)

High Adopt. (M

ha)

NPV (million $)

–low adopt

IRR (%) - low

NPV (million $)- high adoptio

n

IRR (%) - high

OFSP 0.67 1.35 563 35 1,297.7 51

SPVD-resistant varieties

0.48 0.06 673 116 1,380.7 154

Sweetpotato seed system

0.61 1.22 211 44 450.8 57

Weevil-resistant varieties

0.72 1.45 362 41 756.3 51

Sweetpotato results: adoption ceiling & benefits

Technology

Low Adopt. (M ha)

High Adopt. (M ha)

NPV (M$) –

low adopt.

IRR (%) - low

NPV (million $)- high

IRR (%) - high

HYV with resistance to major diseases

2.61 5.22 1,189 57 2,408 69

HYV with high dry matter and starch

3.73 7.47 2,143 71 4345 89

HYV with longer shelf life 3.70 7.40 1,167 44 2,386 53

HY, drought-tolerant and increased water use efficiency

3.99 7.98 3,025 61 6,127 73

Sustainable crop and soil fertility management

3.27 6.54 8,254 210 16,743 301

Cassava results: adoption ceiling & benefits/1

Technology

Low Adopt. (M ha)

High Adopt. (M ha)

NPV (M $) –

low adopt.

IRR (%) - low

NPV (million $)- high adopt.

IRR (%) - high

Integrated pest and disease mgt practices with resist. varieties

3.82 7.54 3,732 60 7,625 71

Efficient . & massive HQPM prod. and distribution.

3.38 6.77 7,585 416 15,299 641

Processing technologies for value addition

2.20 4.41 3,345 120 6,765 158

Strategies to prevent intro. of exotic pests and diseases

1.18 2.36 1,529 71 3,103 86

HYV tolerant to cold weather d f t

0.32 0.63 83 23 194 30

Cassava results: adoption ceiling & benefits/2

Technology

Low Adoption (M

ha)

High Adoption

(Mha)

NPV (M $) –

low adoption

IRR (%) - low

NPV (million $)- high adoptio

n

IRR (%) - high

Agile potato 0.46 0.92 192 24 554 34

Potato seed system 0.43 0.87 88 23 232 34

BW-resistant varieties 0.77 1.55 2,303 68 4,743 87

Virus resistant varieties 0.64 1.27 253 29 535 35

Potato value chain 0.35 0.71 1,909 92 3,898 104

LB resistant varieties 0.04 0.07 193 67 400 87

Potato results: adoption ceiling & benefits

Ex-ante assessment of research options for RTB crops: some results of the economic surplus model.

Technology Adoption ceiling All Benefits Number of beneficiaries Poverty reduction

Lower adoption

Higher adoption

Lower adoption Higher adoption Lower adoption Higher adoption Lower adoption

Higher adoption

‘000 ha ‘000 ha NPV (m USD)

IRR NPV (m USD)

IRR '000 households

'000 persons

'000 households

'000 persons

'000 persons

'000 persons

Banana Bunchy Top Virus (BBTV)

413 793 1,198 56% 2,756 74% 2,063 10,030 3,966 19,013 725 1,400

Cassava high yielding varieties w/CMD&CBSD resistance

2,610 5,200 1,201 69% 2,420 82% 21,100 136,000 42,000 272,000 1,000 2,010

Potatoes Late Blight resistance

774 1,548 1,803 62% 3,738 80% 2,109 9,466 4,217 18,932 306 616

Orange-Flesh Sweet Potato

673 1,346 531 34% 1,232 50% 2,999 14,675 5,998 29,349 451 908

Yam clean planting materials and agronomic practices

660 2, 190 589 40% 2,076 58% 2,420 17,860 8,050 59,520 190 630

Extending economic surplus analysis: estimation of DALY benefits for OFSP

Note: Lower adoption scenario: analysis with 50% lower adoption ceiling. NPV calculated using an interest rate of 10%.

Conclusion and lessons leant

Key outputs of priority assessment • Priority research options selected

based on expert survey results & input from RTB resource persons

• Collection of data/information for model parameters from statistics, existing data sets and group of technical experts

• Economic surplus (ES), poverty and cost-benefit analysis for a total of 31 research options with harmonized assumptions and methods across all five crops

• 10 RTB working papers completed Expert survey & ES report for each crop

• RTBMaps developed as cooperation of RTB Centers interactive online tool providing geographic information to the research and development community of roots, tubers and bananas

All reports uploaded to RTB webpage

http://www.rtb.cgiar.org/category/resources/working-papers/

Online comment function are available!

Summary

• Completed reports are available: http://www.rtb.cgiar.org/category/resources/working-papers

• Communication strategy Sharing with and feedback from stakeholders e.g. SROs (CORAF,ASARECA, IICA, etc.), banana networks, RTB meetings and webpage, social media

– Publications: RTB working papers, journal papers

Lessons learnt: What went well?

• Successful application of priority assessment approach in a multi-Center and multi-crop context (consistent methodology and same set of outputs for each crop)

• Generated valuable information to guide strategic decision making and inform RTB target setting (rich and detailed data set from expert surveys; data compiled for economic surplus analysis both can be further explored)

• Participation of a global group of stakeholders (large scale expert surveys, workshops and groups of resource persons)

• Capacity building of RTB scientists in ex ante impact assessment approaches (crucial especially for Centers with no previous experience in systematic priority assessment)

Lessons learnt: how to improve?

• Careful cross calibration of parameter estimates e.g. to ensure same levels of optimism about scale of adoption and magnitude of effects such as yield increase or cost reductions

• Expand depth and breadth of impact modeling - incorporate additional methods (e.g. DALY for health impacts)

• Harmonize & integrate with other RTB activities - Link data collection from field trials and M&E with PA data needs - Better link development of RTB flagships and PA

• Consistent/continuous involvement of stakeholders - stakeholder feedback on parameter estimates - future use and updating of RTBMaps and Banana mapper - encourage involvement of RTB scientists in (next) PA

• Validate or cross check with farmers’ priorities and yield gaps

Don’t forget to complete survey of opinions about

climate resilience research: See: http://www.rtb.cgiar.org/

Thank you for your attention!

Consortium for Spatial Information (CSI) - CGIAR

100100100100100100100100100100

Online Atlas

Evaluation sites – Trial Sites

Special Achievement in GIS Award ESRI International Conference -2013

Socio-economic RTB Crops Abiotic Tools Biotic Social Management

rtb.cgiar.org/RTBMaps/