Newsletter Special Edition August 2003

Five parallel sub-plenary sessions were organized and designed to maximize interaction among the members of the different GFAR stakeholder constituencies in discussing emerging themes around which potential GPPs could be developed. The themes, selected on the basis of some of the initiatives currently under development by some GFAR stakeholders, include the following: (1) Rural Knowledge Systems and Innovation Processes; (2) Agrobased Small and Medium-sized Enterprises and Markets in Developing Countries; (3) Agriculture-Livestock Integration; (4) Organizational Partnerships for Agricultural Research; and (5) Innovative Policy Directions and Approaches for Sustainable Agricultural Development. A non-exhaustive list of issues for discussion prepared by the Secretariat, was made available to each sub-plenary session as guidelines in order to stimulate discussion (Boxes 8 to 12).

The topic addressed in this sub-plenary session is connected to Action 4 of the GFAR 2001-2003 Business Plan approved in Dresden, Germany (i.e. Policies and Institutional Frameworks). However, as underscored by the GFAR Executive Secretary, it is precisely on this topic that GFAR needs to strengthen its actions and build multistakeholder partnerships in order to effect change towards an effective paradigm for sustainable agriculture and rural development.

Session Structure

The sub-plenary session was chaired by Papa Abdoulaye Seck, Director General of ISRA, with Alain de Janvry of the University of California at Berkeley as key speaker. Marcelino Avila, Project Coordinator of the Rural Institutions and Participation Service (SDAR), FAO, and Joachim von Braun, Director General of IFPRI, Washington DC were resource persons, and Alain Derevier, Senior Adviser of the Research for Sustainable Development, Ministry of Foreign Affairs, France as rapporteur.

Over 50 participants representing a mix of GFAR stakeholders attended the session. The Chairman opened the session by explaining the main objectives and expected outputs. This was followed by presentations from the key speaker and the two resource persons. There was a short discussion after each presentation followed by an extended discussion session at the end of all three presentations.

Presentations

Alain de Janvry presented a paper entitled Achieving Success in Rural Development: Toward Implementation of an Integral Approach. He prefaced his talk by empirically analyzing four key issues: (1) the increased attention on rural development to reach the MDGs; (2) the reasons for ineffectiveness of the integrated rural development approaches; (3) new opportunities for success in rural development; and (4) the lessons learned from experience with new approaches. He proposed an integral rural development (IRD) approach based on five important lessons: (1) an understanding of rural poverty in terms of the actors and institutions involved; (2) the well-being of rural people and households is multidimensional; (3) household assets are heterogeneous but complementary; (4) the value of assets for income generation depends on the context; and (5) there are several roads out of poverty. He then went on to elaborate on four entry points for policies, strategizing and investing in IRD (i.e. programs to increase access to assets, programs to improve the quality of the context where assets are used, transfer programs for social protection, and programs for the social incorporation of the poor). In conclusion, he stated that the transition to IRD must create or generate five essential ingredients to effectively reduce rural poverty: capabilities, citizenship, opportunities, political support and knowledge.

Marcelino Avila made a presentation highlighting five major issues for discussion: (1) the range of policy interventions that should be considered for sustainable agriculture and rural development; (2) the long-term dimension of sustainability by citing the objectives and results of the FAO 2015-2030 world agriculture study; (3) an FAO typology of countries based on agriculture/food security priority and the level/scope of ongoing policy analysis in 89 countries surveyed; (4) the FAO/World Bank project on globalization and assessing its impact on small-holders in four countries in Sub-Saharan Africa; and (5) the Sustainable Agriculture and Rural Development-Farming Systems Evolution (SARD-FSE) project with case studies in Mali, The Philippines and Honduras as an option for promoting and supporting global collaboration on policy/institutional analysis, methodology development and capacity-building.

Joachim von Braun focused on the question of what kind of world would be sustainable in 2050. If we can answer this question, then we can elaborate an appropriate agricultural policy research framework. He identified three important gaps/deficiencies in the current policy discourse which require research: (1) an understanding of the rural-urban linkages and interactions taking into account that nearly 80% of the world population in 2050 will reside in large cities; (2) the optimal devolution and decentralization vis-�-vis the role of the state and other emerging actors; and (3) the future vision, roles and potentials of small-holders in a more globalized and market-oriented environment.

In concluding the presentations, the chairman shared with participants the recent experience of his institute, ISRA, in articulating the vital roles and merits of research and the difficulty in convincing political leaders of the contribution of research to national policy objectives. This example demonstrates perfectly the need for in-depth work on innovative policy dimensions in the GFAR 2004-2006 Business Plan.

Discussion Summary

In the rich discussion that followed the presentations, a number of important issues were debated:

Effective policy, institutions and empowerment of people in the policy process are crucial for dealing with the urgent rural poverty and development problems, in particular for the poor and the small-holders.
There is diversity in the level of priority attributed to agriculture and rural development, diversity in institutional capacities for policy research and action, and diversity in the ability to mobilize political and financial support for agriculture and rural development.
Human population dynamics, migration and the concomitant demand for public goods and services (i.e. health, education, infrastructure, cultural values, etc) require careful analysis, planning, investment and development in order to, for example, create employment and income-generating opportunities in agriculture and rural sectors, especially for the youth. Otherwise, even education can have negative impacts on local rural development since educated youths have to emigrate to improve their livelihood, as described in the case of Malawi.
There are valuable lessons and principles for integral rural development that can be drawn from past rural development approaches, from experimentation with new approaches, and from the emerging roles of NGOs, FOs and other actors in the field.
The lack of effective communication and distribution of relevant information and options from researchers, scientists and technicians to policy-makers, donors and other high-level authorities is hampering the necessary dialogue with and possible support from the higher echelons of power.
Understanding the bigger picture and the global context (e.g. MDGs, CAP in the EU, the Farm Bill in the USA, Agenda 21 of WSSD and the SARD Initiative) is imperative for mobilizing and leveraging political, institutional and financial support for agriculture and rural development.
GFAR, within its facilitation mandate, should play a proactive role, develop a clear understanding of the priorities and engage in a concrete plan of action with respect to policy and institutional improvement nationally, sub-regionally and internationally.

Suggestions and recommendations of the session can be classified into three major groups: (1) targeted researchable issues; (2) basic elements of a GPP on policy dimensions and approaches; and (3) potential partners identified and roles of participating institutions.

Concerning the first group, it was clear that identification, analysis and synthesis of valuable lessons on effective policies, strategies and tools relevant to integral rural development, sustainable agriculture, and/or poverty reduction are needed, particularly in terms of improving: (1) the context or enabling environment; (2) access to assets such as land, education, social capital; (3) the creation of sustainable, productive and income-generating options; and (4) the provision of social protection and reduction of vulnerability of the poor and small-holders.

Research on the long-term agricultural and rural development implications of three strategic gaps in policy/ institutional framework is also a critical issue. These strategic gaps are : (1) an understanding of the rural-urban linkages and interactions; (2) the optimal devolution and decentralization strategy vis-�-vis the role of the state, private sector, NGOs and other emerging actors; and (3) the future vision, roles and potentials of the small-holders in a globalized and market-oriented environment.

Concerning the second group, participants identified as basic element for a GPP the mutual exchange of basic knowledge, methodologies and lessons for policy and institutional analysis, reform, management, etc and, in particular, for developing a framework for effective dialogue and balanced participation of all stakeholders at the local, territorial and national levels.

Capacity-building on leading, designing and implementing sustainable agriculture and integrated rural development for poverty reduction, with particular focus on programs to improve the quality of the context, access to assets, creation of productive and income-generating options, and social protection and vulnerability reduction of the poor was also identified by participants as basic element for a GPP.

The third basic element identified was the mobilization of political commitment and support by effectively participating in global fora (e.g. SARD Initiative for Agenda 21, UN Committee for Sustainable Development, the upcoming ECOSOG, and WTO committees) and regional bodies or mechanisms (e.g. NEPAD, ASEAN, ACP).

Finally, potential partners and roles of participating institutions identified during the discussion were all countries involved in various stages of policy and institutional analysis, as well as case studies, in all regions of the world.

The mission of IFPRI is to identify, analyze and disseminate policies for sustainably meeting the food needs of developing countries. Its research concentrates on economic growth, poverty alleviation and sound management of natural resources that support agriculture in low-income countries, was identified as potential partner as well as FAO through its Sustainable Agriculture and Rural Development-Farming Systems Evolution (SARD-FSE) Project and the Policy Assistance (and Training) Program; the SARD-FSE Project could serve as a catalyst for a GPP within the GFAR framework.

The third potential partner raised from the discussion was IFSA, representing seven regional associations of the developed and developing worlds, whose mission is to make a difference in the lives of small farmers and the rural poor by expanding multistakeholder partnerships for, inter alia, effective agricultural and ecosystems research for sustainable development, small farmers and gender empowerment, and democratization of policy management. IFSA proposes to take the initiative in the international dialogue, for example through the SARD Initiative.

Next Steps

On the basis of this session outcomes, it is recommended that the GFAR Steering Committee should provide direction in terms of the general proposals for further development.

The GFAR Executive Secretary should request elaboration of specific proposals from potential institutional collaborators such as IFPRI, FAO, IFSA and others. The proposals would also include possible partnership arrangements involving national, regional and international types of institutions.

After receiving proposals, the Executive Secretary should dialogue with GFAR stakeholder groups to solicit feedback (e.g. suggestions for improvement, interest in participation, commitment of support, etc).

Box 12. Issues for Discussion-Innovative Policy Directions and Approaches for Sustainable Agricultural Development

Interest in understanding the essential conditions for sustainable agriculture and rural development has increased in recent years, along with the growing recognition of the dynamic and complex nature of the challenges facing rural areas and their communities. This is against the backdrop of an ever-widening gap between rich and poor, the world's poorest being found predominantly in the rural areas, some 800 million people going to bed hungry every night and the level of investment in agriculture and in the rural areas reaching an all-time low, far below what is needed to change the present course for the foreseeable future.

There is an acknowledgement that the agricultural sector, particularly in developing countries, is well placed to contribute to sustainable development. However, this promise has so far mostly gone unfulfilled. Now more than ever, there are urgent demands as well as significant opportunities for developing and spreading the unrealized potentials of currently available agricultural research results and rural innovations. The single most important constraint lies in the domain of the policy environment (i.e. policy directions, measures and incentives that determine to a large extent the decisions of farmers and rural people). Without addressing these policy constraints, the potential for technology adoption and impact is severely limited.

Currently the means of assessing policy change and future policy options is often lacking for decision-makers operating at the micro-, meso-, national and regional levels. This is particularly acute in developing countries which are often confronted with shrinking resources and dramatic demands to increase food production and productivity and to reduce hunger and poverty, while conserving the natural resources and the environment. Furthermore, since ministries of agriculture have been weakened as a result of government restructuring and privatization programs, the national capacity for policy analysis, coordination and advocacy is conspicuously absent.

Policy statements may exist on paper, however it their translation into policy measures, laws and programs is what gives them meaning and impact. Policies affect different groups in different ways; hence the crucial importance of monitoring and evaluating their impact on small-holders, marginalized and other groups of concern. In addition to simple access, the capacity to apply effective methodologies, best practices and decision support tools for policy analysis (i.e. diagnosis, design, implementation and evaluation) are absolutely essential for government institutions and their partners, through participatory interactions, interfacing macro- and micro-stakeholders across sectors, in order to enable agricultural research and rural innovations to succeed in securing sustainable objectives.

Broad guidelines for key speaker

Some of the key policy areas to be addressed to guide governments of developing-country in using appropriate policy instruments, providing economic incentives in their interventions and programs to achieve sustainable agricultural development, are:

macro-economic/fiscal policies (i.e. investment, interest and exchange rates)
agricultural and rural finance policy
land tenure and rights to other resources
international trade, water management, agricultural prices, agricultural technology
rural infrastructure and communication
access to and capacity to apply effective methodologies, best practices and decision support tools for policy analysis.

Broad guidelines for resource person

The resource person is expected to, based on his/her knowledge of GPPs, complement the key speaker's presentation by filling in important areas he/she considers gaps or relevant issues that should feature in the GPP. His/her expos� should help guide and modulate the ensuing discussion in the sub-plenary such that the expected outputs are achieved.

Expected outputs of sub-plenary session

Analysis of current policy constraints for sustainable agricultural development, particularly as it pertains to small-holder and marginalized producer groups in developing countries.
Identification of success stories and/or emerging successful policies for the achievement of productive/sustainability objectives (e.g. through the improvement of governance, enhancement of farmers' assets, improvement of equity and gender issues, and/or improved policies of developed country and international partners).
Identification of effective strategies and mechanisms to dialogue, engage and influence national policy-makers and politicians in terms of food security, economic competitiveness and/or environmental conservation objectives.
Suggestions and analysis of the key priorities for international/regional collaboration (north-south and south-south partnerships) for future policy analysis, capacity-building and networking for sustainable agricultural development, with particular emphasis on the small-holder farmers in developing countries.
Ensuing discussions in this group should lead to: (1) an elaboration of how we could develop a GPP to address the key policy issues, constraints and challenges in achieving sustainable agricultural development; (2) the production of an indicative list of the type of expertise required to further develop and implement such a GPP; and (3) agreement on the possible institutional arrangements for the facilitation and implementation of the GPP.

Print version

GFAR Secretariat
c/o FAO, SDR, Viale delle Terme di Caracalla - 00100 Rome, Italy
Tel. +39.06.5705.3413 Fax +39.06.5705.3898
E-mail: