SDR/TAC:IAR/96/18.1
CONSULTATIVE GROUP ON INTERNATIONAL AGRICULTURAL RESEARCH
TECHNICAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE
TAC SECRETARIAT
FOOD AND AGRICULTURE ORGANIZATION OF THE UNITED NATIONS
March 1997
Casilla 209-12
Santiago
CHILE
3 March 1997
Dear Dr. Winkelmann,
I am pleased to submit the report on CGIAR Priorities for Marginal Lands. The earlier version discussed at TAC 71 has been revised in light of that discussion and further exchange of views among members of the Panel. The revision is based exclusively on clarification of the concept of "marginal land" which changed drastically between Phase I and II and was modified further in the final report as a result of the above discussions. In consequence, Chapters 1 to 3 of the Phase II report were changed. However, the strategic elements (Chapters 5, 6 and 7) and the overall conclusions remain essentially unchanged.
At the outset I would like to trace the evolution of the Panel's thinking, starting from four tenets of conventional wisdom on: the nature of marginal lands; the concentration of - rural poverty on such lands; the linkage between poverty and accelerated resource degradation; and the role of CGIAR research in poverty alleviation on these lands.
This line of thinking holds that:
marginal lands are defined in biophysical terms which establish them as: having low inherent productivity for agriculture; being susceptible to degradation; and involving high risks for agricultural production;they support a high proportion of the rural poor, particularly the poorest of the poor;
the combination of fragility and high density of poor people who place a premium on current consumption (resulting in over-exploitation of natural resources) is leading to accelerated erosion or vegetation destruction; the consequence is a downward spiral of poverty and resource degradation with significant negative externalities;
the impact of CGIAR research on agricultural productivity increase, environmental protection and, above all, poverty alleviation, has been limited on these areas.
.../2
Dr. Donald Winkelmann
Chair
Technical Advisory Committee (TAC)
355 East Palace Avenue
Santa Fé, NM 87501
USA
These ideas underlie the terms of reference (TOR) for the study and was fully adopted by the Panel and the TAC Secretariat in the initial stages of their work. It provided the basis for design of the extensive data collection and analysis undertaken by the Secretariat to quantify marginal biophysical characteristics, rural population and rural poor living on these areas, and CGIAR expenditures devoted to research on productivity increase (agriculture, forestry and fisheries), post-harvest activities and options for removal of institutional constraints, all of which were expected to contribute to poverty alleviation on "marginal lands" as defined by their biophysical characteristics.
The Panel subsequently rejected the first three tenets, but in defining marginal agricultural lands (MALs) relevance and credibility are implicitly assigned to both the concept that such lands can be defined solely by biophysical characteristics, and the project characteristics and expenditures (applied to MALs so defined) can be derived from the CGIAR project database.
The bottom line is the Panel's conclusion that neither the global and regional quantification of marginal land areas (based on biophysical data), nor the assessment of CGIAR projects and expenditures assignable to these various land areas, are relevant to the CGIAR's decision on strategy for poverty alleviation. In the final report, the marginal land issue is clarified by introducing the concept of "marginal areas" (MA) as being those where there are concentrations of marginal rural people and where the definition of geographic area would derive from a set of relatively homogeneous variables deemed to generate rural poverty. Biophysical characteristics would be one element in the equation.
This definition of marginal lands led the Panel to diverge from the original TOR. It clearly did not have the data to quantify the numbers of rural poor on areas specified by the sets of elements which explain why they are marginal. Thus the conclusions, in contrast to the expected output of the study, are general. No specific inferences are drawn on potential poverty alleviation gains from research investment on MAs to develop new technologies, understand farm and off-farm linkages in family survival strategies, and assess constraints and opportunities for change in the policy and institutional environment which may be seen as hindering poverty alleviation. Further, the Panel felt it was not in a position to assess the appropriate balance between CGIAR research investment targeted to MAs and to non-MAs. This step would follow from a clarification of where marginal people are, why they are marginal, and the options open to the System in addressing poverty in MAs.
On behalf of myself and the Panel I would like to express appreciation once again for the opportunity to address a small but challenging segment of the issues faced by the CGIAR, and for the chance to work with the Secretariat and members of the Committee.
Sincerely yours,
Michael Nelson
Panel Chair
CONSULTATIVE GROUP ON INTERNATIONAL AGRICULTURAL RESEARCH
TECHNICAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE
REPORT OF THE
STUDY ON CGIAR RESEARCH PRIORITIES
FOR MARGINAL LANDS
|
Chair: |
Michael Nelson |
|
Members: |
Rudy Dudal |
|
|
Hans Gregersen |
|
|
Narpat Jodha |
|
|
Daniel Nyamai |
|
Consultants: |
Jan-Peter Groenewold |
|
|
Filemon Torres |
|
Secretary: |
Amir Kassam (TAC Secretariat) |
TAC SECRETARIAT
FOOD AND AGRICULTURE ORGANIZATION OF THE UNITED NATIONS
March 1997
