Use of lightweight, 5-9-horsepower mini-tillers by smallholder farmers in Nepal’s mid-hills cut tillage costs and boosted maize yields by facilitating timely maize cultivation, thus enhancing food self-sufficiency and farm profits and reducing rural poverty, a new study by an international team of scientists shows.
Published in the Journal of Economics and Development, the study reports findings of an on-farm survey involving more than 1,000 representative households from 6 districts of the mid-hills, a region of steep and broken terrain where rainfed maize is a staple crop, outmigration of working-age inhabitants makes farm labor scarce and costly, and farmers on small, fragmented landholdings typically till plots by hand or using ox-drawn plows.
“Conventional two- or four-wheel tractors are difficult to operate in the mid-hills’ rugged topography,” said Gokul P. Paudel, researcher working together with the International Maize and Wheat Improvement Center (CIMMYT) and Leibniz University, Hannover, Germany, and lead author of the study. “Farms are small and the mini-tillers are a good fit. Very small farms — those comprising less than 0.4 hectares of land and normally not served by hired farm labor or larger machinery — benefited the most from mini-tiller adoption.”
The paper is the first to provide empirical linkages between small-scale farm mechanization and the UN Sustainable Development Goals, particularly No Poverty (SDG-1) and Zero Hunger (SDG-2).
“Given its rural poverty and the resulting outmigration from farm areas to cities and to other countries, Nepal has increasingly become a labor-exporting country,” explained Paudel, who partnered in this study with researchers from the Asian Development Bank Institute and Cornell University. “Our research can help guide investments by Nepal and other developing countries in scale-appropriate farm mechanization, supporting those who wish to remain on rural homesteads and make a go of it.”
Machine operators starting the mini-tiller in the Kavrepalanchok district in the mid-hills of Nepal. (Photo: CIMMYT)
The science team found that farm size, labor shortages, draft animal scarcity, and market proximity were major factors that facilitate the adoption of appropriate mechanization in Nepal, according to Tim Krupnik, CIMMYT systems agronomist and study co-author.
“Smallholder farms dominate more than two-thirds of agricultural systems globally,” Krupnik said. “Interest in scale-appropriate farm mechanization is growing rapidly, particularly among donors and governments, and practical empirical measures of its impact are crucial.” The findings of the latest study fill this knowledge gap and provide sufficient evidence to prioritize the spread of appropriate technologies among smallholder farmers.
Krupnik noted that, through its office in Nepal and strong shared research and capacity-building activities, CIMMYT has worked for almost four decades with Nepali scientists and development partners, including the Nepal Agricultural Research Council (NARC) and the Ministry of Agriculture and Livestock Development (MoALD), to raise the productivity and sustainability of the country’s maize- and wheat-based farming systems.
In addition to strong government partnerships, CIMMYT works closely in Nepal with a range of non-government organizations, and importantly, hand-in-hand with private farm machinery manufacturers, retailers, and mechanics.
The study described was supported by the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, the US Agency for International Development (USAID), the Academy for International Agricultural Research (ACINAR) commissioned by the German Federal Ministry for Economic Cooperation and Development (BMZ) and carried out by ATSAF e.V. on behalf of the Deutsche Gesellschaft fur Internationale Zusammenarbeit (GIZ) GmbH, the One CGIAR Regional Integrated Initiative Transforming Agrifood Systems in South Asia (TAFSSA), and generous funders who contribute to the CGIAR Trust Fund.
Despite the development of improved wheat varieties with increased productivity, farming systems in the Global South are still marred by inequitable access based on gender and other social characteristics.
Focusing on Ethiopia and India due to their large wheat economies and challenges with inequality, researchers assessed the barriers preventing male and female smallholders from using modern wheat varieties. Issues covered through evaluation could include wheat varietal trait preferences, adoption of technology, and decision-making and labor-use changes associated with new varieties.
Concluding the paper is the argument that institutional arrangements in research and development (R&D) programs must transform to address gender equity and inclusivity in wheat improvement.
Cover photo: Rural farmers associated with JEEViKa-Bihar attend a public wheat harvest activity organized by the Cereal Systems in South Asia (CSISA) project in Nagwa village, India, to encourage conservation agriculture practices in the region. (Photo: Nima Chodon/CIMMYT)
Solar Powered Irrigation System in Bihar, India. (Credit: Ayush Manik)
In the race to make food production and consumption more sustainable, South Asia is key.
Home to one quarter of humanity — one-fifth of whom are youth — the region has the world’s largest concentration of poverty and malnutrition. While South Asia produces one quarter of the world’s consumed food, its agrifood systems today face formidable poverty reduction, climate change adaptation and mitigation, environmental health, and biodiversity challenges. Significant hurdles remain to secure an adequate and affordable supply of diverse foods necessary for sustainable and healthy diets.
South Asia’s predominantly rice-based farming systems are crucial to food security and political and economic stability, but parts of this region are threatened by unsustainable groundwater withdrawal — the region extracts one-quarter of global groundwater — due to food and energy policy distortions. South Asia’s farmers are both contributors to and victims of climate change and extreme weather that disproportionately affect resource-poor and women farmers.
The region needs food systems that generate profits and incentivize farmers to produce nutritious foods, while also reducing prices for consumers purchasing healthy products by shortening and reducing inefficiencies within value chains. A new CGIAR Research Initiative, Transforming Agrifood Systems in South Asia (TAFSSA), aims to address challenges.
Several recent studies document the long-term health and economic benefits from the “Green Revolution” — the widespread adoption of high-yielding staple crop varieties during the last half of the 20th century — and argue for continued investment in the development and use of such varieties.
“Our estimates provide compelling evidence that the health benefits of broad-based increases in agricultural productivity should not be overlooked,” the authors state. “From a policy perspective, government subsidies for inputs leading to a green revolution as well as investments in extension and R&D programs seem to be important.”
Norman Borlaug (fourth from right) shows a plot of Sonora-64 wheat — one of the semi-dwarf, high-yield, disease-resistant varieties that was key to the Green Revolution — to a group of young international trainees at CIMMYT’s experimental station in Ciudad Obregon, Sonora state, Mexico. (Photo: CIMMYT)
The COVID-19 pandemic exposed the fragility of the global food system and the need to transform it, increasing its environmental and economic resilience to withstand future threats, and underpinning healthier diets. The studies suggest that improved versions of cereal crops such as rice, wheat, and maize can play a key role.
“Our work speaks to the importance of supporting innovation and technology adoption in agriculture as a means of fostering economic development, improved health, and poverty reduction, said author Jan von der Goltz. “It also suggests that it is reasonable to view with some alarm the steady decline in funding for cereal crop improvement over the last few decades in sub-Saharan Africa, the continent with least diffusion of modern varieties.”
Likewise, a study co-authored by Prashant Bharadwaj of the University of California, San Diego, concluded that farmer adoption of high-yielding crop varieties (HYVs) in India reduced infant mortality dramatically across the country. Between 1960 and 2000, infant deaths dropped from 163.8 to 66.6 per 1,000 live births, and this occurred during the decades of India’s wheat productivity leap from 0.86 to 2.79 tons per hectare, as a result of HYV adoption and improved farming practices.
“What both of these papers do is to carefully establish a causal estimate of how HYVs affect infant mortality, by only comparing children born in the same location at different points in time, when HYV use was different, and by checking that mortality before arrival of HYVs was trending similarly in places that would receive different amount of HYVs,” Bharadwaj said.
“In the absence of a randomized control trial, these econometric techniques produce the best causal estimate of a phenomenon as important as the spread of HYVs during and after the Green Revolution,” he added. These thoughts were echoed by University of California San Diego professor Gordon McCord, a co-author of the global study.
Recent studies indicate that the Green Revolution also had long-term economic impacts, which also affected health outcomes.
In a 2021 update to the 2018 paper “Two Blades of Grass: The Impact of the Green Revolution,” Douglas Gollin, Professor of Development Economics at Oxford University and co-authors found that, in 90 countries where high-yielding varieties were adopted between 1965 and 2010, food crop yields increased by 44% and that, had this adoption not occurred, GDP per capita in the developing world could be half of what it is today.
Even a 10-year delay of the Green Revolution would, in 2010, have cost 17% of GDP per capita in the developing world, with a cumulative GDP loss of $83 trillion, equivalent to one year of current global GDP.
These GDP and health impacts were boosted by a related reduction in population growth. By observing causal inference at country, regional and developing world levels, and using a novel long-term impact assessment method, the study authors detected a trend: as living standards improved for rural families, they generally wanted to invest more in their children and have fewer.
“Our estimates suggest that the world would have contained more than 200 million additional people in 2010, if the onset of the Green Revolution had been delayed for ten years,” Gollin and his co-authors stated. This lower population growth seems to have increased the relative size of the working age population, which furthered GDP growth.
Ethiopian farmers give feedback to CGIAR researchers about durum wheat varieties. (Photo: C.Fadda/Bioversity International) (CC BY-NC-ND 2.0)
A long-term investment in system transformation
It takes time from the point of an intervention to when broad health impacts can be observed in the population, the authors note. For example, although the development of modern high-yielding varieties began in the 1950s and 60s, the rate of adoption did not speed up until the 1980s, 1990s, and even into the 2000s, with evidence from sub-Saharan Africa showing that variety adoption has increased by as much in the 2000s as in the four preceding decades.
In addition, any nutrition and food security strategy which aims to reach the second Sustainable Development Goal of feeding 9 billion by 2050 must incorporate wider system transformation solutions, such as zero-emissions agriculture, affordable, diverse diets and increased land conservation.
As Gollin explained, “The Green Revolution taught us that we need to approach productivity increases, especially in staple crop yields, differently. The challenge now is more complex: we need to get the same productivity increases, with fewer inputs and resources, more environmental awareness, and in larger quantities for more people.”
In part, this means increasing productivity on existing agricultural land with positive environmental and social impacts, according to Bram Govaerts, director general of the International Maize and Wheat Improvement Center (CIMMYT).
“Breeding and sharing more productive, hardy crop varieties is as important as ever,” Govaerts said, “but also engaging farmers — in our case, smallholders — in shared research and innovation efforts to bridge yield gaps, build climate-resilient farming systems, and open access to better nutrition and market opportunities.”
Cover photo: Children eat lunch at a mobile crèche outside Delhi, India. (Photo: Atul Loke/ODI) (CC BY-NC 2.0)
Researchers at work at CGIAR’s International Institute of Tropical Agriculture campus in Ibadan, Nigeria. (Credit: Chris de Bode/CGIAR)
A five-year partnership being launched by the Innovative Genomics Institute (IGI)—a non-profit founded by Nobel Laureate Jennifer Doudna—and CGIAR, the world’s largest publicly-funded agricultural research partnership, will harness the power of science to help millions of people overcome poverty, hunger and malnutrition.
One in four people globally, and rising, are unable to afford a healthy diet. COVID-19 has exacerbated this trend by disrupting food production and distribution, driving up by 20 percent the number of people threatened by hunger in 2020. The pandemic is unfolding amidst an environmental and climate crisis which is undermining food production and our ability to nourish the world.
But global consensus is building for urgent action. At the COP26 meetings in November, 45 nations committed to shifting to more sustainable ways of farming and accelerate the deployment of green innovations. Similarly, in late September, many government representatives at the United Nations Food Systems Summit committed to accelerating the transformation of how we grow, transport, process, and consume food. Recognizing the centrality of science and innovation for driving that transformation, United Nations Secretary-General António Guterres called on the world to scale public and private investment in research for food.
According to Barbara Wells, Global Director for Genetic Innovation at CGIAR: “World-class science is vital for facilitating farmer adaptation and mitigating our food system’s contribution to climate change. Plant-breeding innovations can help ramp up food production while making farms more climate resilient, profitable and environmentally friendly”.
“Technologies such as gene editing, which enable scientists to make targeted changes to a crop’s DNA, can accelerate the development of more disease-resistant, water-efficient varieties that can improve food production and nutrition in areas that are especially vulnerable to climate change,” Dr. Wells explained.
CGIAR has produced and promoted innovations that are boosting the sustainable production of nutritious food in Africa, Asia and Latin America. Over the past five decades, CGIAR scientists and national partners have developed and disseminated robust and highly productive crop varieties and livestock breeds tailored to the needs of local men and women. Those innovations have helped hundreds of millions of people across the Global South overcome hunger and poverty.
The IGI is a collaboration of the University of California, Berkeley and the University of California, San Francisco with a mission to develop revolutionary genome-editing tools that enable affordable and accessible solutions in human health, climate, and agriculture. The IGI’s Climate & Sustainable Agriculture program focuses on developing crops that are resistant to pests and diseases, resilient to a changing climate, and less dependent on farmer inputs. Whereas the IGI is a pioneer in applied genomic research, CGIAR focuses on translating discoveries into improved crop varieties and cropping systems. This partnership provides an accelerated pipeline from upstream innovation to real-world impact.
“The IGI is testing technologies with great potential to benefit people in the countries where CGIAR is active, such as a way of removing the cyanide found in cassava—a staple upon which nearly a billion people depend—and fighting diseases in economically important crops like wheat, rice and bananas,” said Brian Staskawicz, the IGI Director of Sustainable Agriculture.
“The IGI is also pioneering new ways to reduce methane emissions from rice farming, which accounts for 2.5 percent of humanity’s contribution to global warming, by using genomic approaches to reduce methane production by soil microbes,” he added.
“By partnering with CGIAR, the IGI can ensure that the products of its research will benefit farmers and consumers in some of the world’s poorest countries, where CGIAR has been working for 50 years and has extensive partner networks,” said Dr. Melinda Kliegman, Director of Public Impact at the IGI. “Together we can accelerate the development and delivery of more climate-resilient, productive and nutritious crops for resource-poor farmers and consumers.”
Over the next five years, the IGI and CGIAR will use the latest breakthroughs in genomic science to enhance the resilience and productivity of farmers in low- and middle-income countries and improve the wellbeing and livelihoods of women and men in some of the world’s poorest communities.
Authored by CGIAR and the Innovative Genomics Institute (IGI)
Cover photo: Researchers at work at CGIAR’s International Institute of Tropical Agriculture campus in Ibadan, Nigeria. (Credit: Chris de Bode/CGIAR)
Amidst the transition to One CGIAR and COVID-19 lockdowns, the world’s leading maize and wheat research organization’s community found the time to slow down and weigh the successes and bottlenecks of this complicated year. More than 400 people spread across the International Maize and Wheat Improvement Center’s (CIMMYT) 13 offices worldwide gathered for an all-staff virtual event to close 2020.
Aided by world-renowned economist Jeffrey Sachs’ vast experience in detangling global crises, sustainable development and poverty alleviation, staff reflected on the role they play within CGIAR and in helping CIMMYT increase its impact on nutrition security, poverty alleviation and a better world.
Connecting from his home in New York, Sachs urged CGIAR to see beyond the research priorities it set out to accomplish a half a century ago. With the 50th anniversary of CGIAR in 2021, Sachs encouraged CGIAR to think about the research priorities for the next 50 years. “We’re confronting a probably more systemic and even more complex set of challenges in food in 2021, than perhaps was the case in 1971,” he said.
“We need to expand the research agenda beyond the still-important focus on improved yields and varieties to consider the food system holistically. Our goal is a global food system that enables healthy diets, sustainable land use, resilience to environmental change, and good livelihoods for farm families.”
“Our goal is a global food system that enables healthy diets, sustainable land use, resilience to environmental change, and good livelihoods for farm families.”
Albeit not as famous as its colleague organizations the Food and Agriculture Organization of the UN (FAO) and the World Food Programme (WFP), CGIAR has been called “essential to feeding our future” by Bill Gates. Sachs echoed this sentiment and urged CGIAR to embrace its vital role in “achieving sustainable agriculture and healthy diets for all.”
The next 50 years
As CIMMYT moves into One CGIAR, it will capitalize on its over 50 years of experience, impact and expertise in genetic innovations, systems transformation and tools for resilient agri-food systems and fully embrace One CGIAR’s mission of delivering science and innovation that advance transformation of food, land and water systems in a climate crisis.
Throughout 2020, COVID-19 and global conflicts have put an almost impossible pressure on already overwhelmed agricultural production, smallholders’ livelihoods and global supply chains. As with any system, it requires resilience for its long-term sustainability. “Of course, CGIAR’s central goal has been to anticipate the future needs of food production and areas of new resilience such as flood resilience or drought,” said Sachs.
“I would add [for its future strategy to also consider] resilience to social disruptions and disruptions to global supply chains, as we experience with COVID-19 but also with geopolitical tensions,” he advised.
Jeffery Sachs quoted at CIMMYT’s virtual event in December 2020. (Graphic: CIMMYT)
Keeping cereals in the equation
While diversification is important to human diets and the sustainability of agricultural production, we cannot afford to ignore the major cereals. Maize, rice and wheat provide a basic nutritional value, macro- and micronutrients that many people across the globe can afford and access.
Sachs asked CGIAR to look deeply at the question of poverty and food poverty, both in rural and urban areas. “CGIAR has more knowledge of how smallholders are living and how their lives are changing than any other research institution in the world. And I think your work can therefore give tremendous guidance on the overall fight against poverty and on the anticipation of increased urbanization in future years, as agriculture becomes more mechanized, and as smallholders or the children of today’s smallholders leave for urban areas in the coming generation.”
“CGIAR has more knowledge of how smallholders are living and how their lives are changing than any other research institution in the world. And I think your work can therefore give tremendous guidance on the overall fight against poverty.”
Sachs acknowledged the large and important task that CGIAR faces in its future. “All of this is incredibly difficult. […] I find the food system challenges to be the most complex of all of the sustainability challenges we face.”
He spoke of the task at hand with urgency and that there is no greater intellectual challenge than the transformation to sustainable agriculture: “The role of the CGIAR will be unique and indispensable in helping to guide us through those transformations. I think this is the indispensable time for the CGIAR to lay out its new research agenda for the next 50 years to be the one that helps us to achieve the Sustainable Development Goals and the Paris Climate Agreement.”
At present, nearly half of the world’s population is under some form of government restriction to curb the spread of COVID-19. In Bangladesh, in the wake of five deaths and 48 infections early in the year, the government imposed a nationwide lockdown between March 24 and May 30, 2020. Until April 17, 38 of the country’s 64 districts were under complete lockdown.
“While this lockdown restricted the spread of the disease, in the absence of effective support, it can generate severe food and nutrition insecurity for daily wage-based workers,” says Khondoker Mottaleb, an agricultural economist based at the International Maize and Wheat Improvement Center (CIMMYT).
Of the 61 million people who make up Bangladesh’s employed labor force, nearly 35% are paid daily. In a new study published in PLOS ONE, Mottaleb examines the food security and welfare impacts of the lockdowns on these daily-wage workers — in both farm and non-farm sectors — who are comparatively more resource-poor in terms of land ownership and education, and therefore likely to be hit hardest by a loss in earnings.
Using information from 50,000 economically active workers in Bangladesh, collected by the Bangladesh Bureau of Statistics (BBS), the study quantifies the economic losses from the COVID-19 lockdowns based on daily-wage workers’ lost earnings and estimates the minimum compensation packages needed to ensure their minimum food security during the lockdown period.
Using the estimated daily wage earnings, the authors estimate that a one-day, complete lockdown generates an economic loss equivalent to $64.2 million. After assessing the daily per capita food expenditure for farm and non-farm households, the study estimates the need for a minimum compensation package of around $1 per day per household to ensure minimum food security for the daily wage-based worker households.
In May 2020, the Government of Bangladesh announced the provision of approximately $24 per month to two million households, half of whom will receive additional food provision. While this amount is in line with Mottaleb’s findings, he stresses than this minimum support package is only suitable for the short-term, and that in the event of a prolonged lockdown period it will be necessary to consider additional support for other household costs such as clothing, medicine and education.
“Without effective support programs, the implementation of a strict lockdown for a long time may be very difficult, if poor households are forced to come out to search for work, money and food,” explains Mottaleb. “In the event of a very strict lockdown scenario, the government should consider issuing movement passes to persons and carriers of agricultural input and output to support smallholder agriculture, wage workers and agricultural value chains.”
A woman sells maize at the market in Sidameika Tura, Arsi Negele, Ethiopia. (Photo: Peter Lowe/CIMMYT)
Disclaimer: The views and opinions expressed in this article are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the official views or position of the International Maize and Wheat Improvement Center (CIMMYT).
While all eyes are on Lombardy, Madrid, New York and Wuhan, what do we know about the impact of COVID-19 on the rural poor and on food security in developing countries? How can the impact of the crisis be moderated? What positive breakthroughs could be provoked by this shock to move us into a better “new normal”? What can donors and implementing organizations do to support low- and middle-income countries during and beyond this crisis?
Members of the Agriculture and Rural Development working group of the international Scaling Up community of practice held a virtual meeting to discuss these questions and how scaling-up innovations could help to recover from the current crisis and mitigate future ones.
Poor rural communities are particularly vulnerable
When it comes to a highly contagious disease, being in a rural area sounds better than being in a busy city, but that is a deceptive impression. Smallholder farmers often are older than average and hence more vulnerable to the virus, and they have less access to health services.
They also depend on field laborers that are not able to travel from surrounding villages to help with planting, weeding and harvesting. To process crops, smallholder farmers need to transport crops to processing centers, which may be closed, as are the markets where they obtain agricultural inputs or sell farm products. Large international agrobusiness firms, which supply inputs and purchase local famers’ products may withdraw, at least temporarily, from the rural economies. There are already reports of farmers feeding cattle strawberries and broccoli in India, as they are unable to get their goods to the market.
Most farmers also depend on non-farm and off-farm activities for their livelihoods, as they may be field laborers for other farmers, work in the processing industry or work in construction. Interrupted transportation and closures pose serious challenges to maintain safe business continuity throughout the rural economy. The risk is not only that immediate rural production, food deliveries, exports, employment and incomes will collapse, but also that planting for next year’s crops will be disrupted.
It is key to differentiate between global and local supply chains, which will suffer in different ways. For example, in Uganda, supermarkets are open but small, informal markets are closed. In past crises, governments have focused on the survival of global value chains over local ones. Small, rural businesses are more likely to close permanently than large international ones.
Globally, international support for agriculture and rural development has been lagging in recent years. Today, the international support from aid agencies and NGOs is interrupted, as travels are restricted and community meetings are prohibited. With increased donor attention to a domestic and international health crisis, aid for rural communities may drop precipitously.
Men transport wheat straw on donkey karts in Ethiopia’s Dodula district. (Photo: Peter Lowe/CIMMYT)
Opportunities for an improved “new normal” as we respond to the crisis
The short-term response to help minimize the impact of the COVID-19 crisis on the rural poor is critical, but we also need to support the shaping of a “new normal” where rural food systems are resilient, profitable and inclusive for poor rural communities. Members of the Scaling Up community of practice explored various ideas.
First, the COVID-19 pandemic could present opportunities to break silos and show how closely health and agriculture are related.
“COVID-19 cuts across sectors and jurisdictions in ways that single organizations and established governance structures are ill-equipped to accommodate,” said Larry Cooley, Scaling Expert and Founder and President Emeritus of Management Systems International (MSI)
For example, rural agricultural extension networks could be used to disseminate information on health awareness and education around COVID-19 and collect data on local impacts. This may cause and provide relief in the short term, but may also provide opportunities for collaboration in the long run.
“Our agricultural networks go deep into the rural areas and we are training our agri-entrepreneurs in India to disseminate health messages, products and services to help address COVID-19,” said Simon Winter, Executive Director of the Syngenta Foundation.
“At the African Development Bank we are providing emergency relief finance and re-purposing funding to have a link with COVID-19,” said Atsuko Toda, the bank’s Director of Agricultural Finance and Rural Development.
Second, a “new normal” could also mean an even stronger independence from externally funded projects, experts and solutions to more local ownership and expertise in rural areas, something that the community of practice has been promoting strongly. We could help to support more autonomy of the farmer, a strong local market and scale-up local value chains. Strengthening the capacity of small and medium enterprises linking farmers to urban markets could help ensure stability in future economic shocks.
“Governments and donor ‘projects’ looked too much at export and global value chains. I see great opportunities to scale up local and regional input and output value chains that benefit local farmers and small and medium enterprises,” said Margret Will, expert on value chains.
Third, the COVID-19 pandemic presents an opportunity to accelerate the scaling of innovations.
“Lack of access to labor could be disrupting harvesting and planting in our Feed the Future countries, accelerating an already predominant trend of migration, especially among the young, to urban areas. We see a looming need for mechanization of farms at scale, using mini-tillers, planters, harvesters and other time- and labor-saving equipment,” said Mark Huisenga, Senior Program Manager for the USAID Bureau for Resilience and Food Security.
Masimba Mawire collects bare maize cobs after removing the grain using a mechanized maize sheller in Zimbabwe. (Photo: Matthew O’Leary/CIMMYT)
Rural communities that use more ecological intensive practices, such as conservation agriculture and push-pull farming or safe storage practices are less dependent on external inputs and labor.
The current crisis forces us to use digital communication systems, replace human work with digital tools where possible and use technology to help target interventions. Both the public and private sector could build on this opportunity to invest in increased access to internet, electricity and other digital resources, including in impoverished areas. All these technological innovations can help farmers to better cope with the constraints of COVID-19 and any future crises or stresses to the food system, while also making agriculture more productive and more attractive to the young.
“The pandemic creates an opportunity to accelerate the use of digital technologies in smallholder agriculture, not only for extension advice but to crowdsource information about COVID-19 impacts,” said Julie Howard, Senior Advisor for the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS).
Finally, COVID-19 will change our global governance system, and the agriculture, research and development sector has a role to play in this transformation. A systems change must focus on dietary diversity and food safety and security, paying attention to the rural poor in low- and middle-income countries. We can work together to scale cross-sector platforms to build solid networks and scale-up innovations to strengthen sustainable and resilient food systems.
Systems change beyond the agricultural sector, sustainability through local ownership and uptake of innovations that support profitable and resilient agricultural and related rural activities are key components of how the Scaling Up Community of Practice approaches scaling. A systems change is imminent, and it is important to support a transformation in a direction where local markets, rural labor and regional economies come out stronger in the long term. This requires vision, expertise, mobilization of resources, information sharing and crowdsourced leadership, and the network of scaling experts can contribute to this.
The Agriculture and Rural Development working group of the international Scaling Up community of practice is made up of individuals from more than 100 official donors, foundations, think tanks, research and development organizations united by their interest in scaling the impact of innovations on food security and rural poverty. Areas of particular interest for the group include designing for scale, using scaling frameworks, learning about scaling, responsible scaling, sustainability and system thinking. Members of the working group include professionals with vast experience from the field, and the group explicitly tries to learn from the application of complex concepts such as sustainability, systems change and scaling in real world settings by local actors. In addition to quarterly virtual meetings, the working group encourages and supports exchanges among its members on a variety of subjects. Participation in, and management of, the Agriculture and Rural Development working group is done on a purely voluntary basis.
About the Authors:
Lennart Woltering — Scaling catalyst at CIMMYT and chair of the Agriculture and Rural Development working group.
Johannes Linn — Non-resident Senior Fellow at Brookings and former Vice President of the World Bank.
Maria Boa — Scaling coordinator at CIMMYT and secretary of the Agriculture and Rural Development working group
Mary Donovan — Communications Consultant at CIMMYT.
Farmer Dhansa Bhandari (left) sows maize seed while Bikram Daugi (right) ploughs with his oxen in Ramghat, Surkhet, Nepal. (Photo: P. Lowe/CIMMYT)
Although the conventional wisdom in South Asian rural villages is that men are principally responsible for pulling their families out of poverty, our recent study showed the truth to be more subtle, and more female.
In our new paper we dig into focus groups and individual life stories in a sample of 32 farming villages from five countries of South Asia. Although we asked about both men’s and women’s roles, focus groups of both sexes emphasized men in their responses — whether explaining how families escaped poverty or why they remained poor.
“Women usually cannot bring a big change, but they can assist their men in climbing up,” explains a member of the poor men’s focus group from Ismashal village (a pseudonym) of Pakistan’s Khyber Pakhtunkhwa province.
The focus group testimonies presented rich examples of the strong influence of gender norms: the social rules that dictate differential roles and conducts for men and women in their society. These norms significantly influenced how local people conceived of movements in and out of poverty in their village and in their own lives.
According to the women’s focus group from Rangpur district in Bangladesh, women “cannot work outside the home for fear of losing their reputation and respect.”
However, in these same communities, men’s and women’s productive roles proved far more variable in the mobility processes of their families than conveyed by the focus groups. We encountered many households with men making irregular or very limited contributions to family maintenance. This happens for a number of reasons, including men’s labor migration, disability, family conflict and separations, aging and death.
What’s more, when sharing their life stories in individual interviews, nearly every woman testified to her own persistent efforts to make a living, cover household expenses, deal with debts, and, when conditions allowed, provide a better life for their families. In fact, our life story sample captured 12 women who testified to making substantial contributions to moving their families out of poverty.
Movers and shakers
We were especially struck by how many of these women “movers” were employing innovative agricultural technologies and practices to expand their production and earnings.
“In 2015, using zero tillage machines I started maize farming, for which I had a great yield and large profit,” reports a 30-year-old woman and mother of two from Matipur, Bangladesh who brought her family out of poverty.
Another 30-year-old mover, a farmer and mother of two from the village of Thool in Nepal, attests to diversification and adoption of improved cultivation practices: “I got training on vegetable farming. In the beginning the agriculture office provided some vegetable seeds as well. And I began to grow vegetables along with cereal crops like wheat, paddy, maize, oats. […] I learnt how to make soil rows.”
Among the women who got ahead, a large majority credited an important man in their life with flouting local customs and directly supporting them to innovate in their agricultural livelihoods and bring their families out of poverty.
Across the “mover” stories, women gained access to family resources which enabled them to step up their livelihood activities. For example, three quarters of the women “movers” spoke of husbands or brothers supporting them to pursue important goals in their lives.
Women’s most important relationship helping them to pursue goals in life: women “movers” (on left) versus “chronic poor” (right).
Sufia, from a village in the Rajshahi district of Bangladesh, describes how she overcame great resistance from her husband to access a farm plot provided by her brother. The plot enabled Sufia to cultivate betel leaves and paddy rice, and with those profits and additional earnings from livestock activities, she purchased more land and diversified into eggplant, chilies and bitter gourd. Sufia’s husband had struggled to maintain the family and shortly after Sufia began to prosper, he suffered a stroke and required years of medical treatments before passing away.
When Sufia reflects on her life, she considers the most important relationship in her life to be with her brother. “Because of him I can now stand on my two feet.”
We also studied women and their families who did not move out of poverty. These “chronic poor” women rarely mentioned accessing innovations or garnering significant benefits from their livelihoods. In these life stories, we find far fewer testimonies about men who financially supported a wife or sister to help her pursue an important goal.
The restrictive normative climate in much of South Asia means that women’s capacity to enable change in their livelihoods is rarely recognized or encouraged by the wider community as a way for a poor family to prosper. Still, the life stories of these “movers” open a window onto the possibilities unlocked when women have opportunities to take on more equitable household roles and are able to access agricultural innovations.
The women movers, and the men who support them, provide insights into pathways of more equitable agricultural change. What we can learn from these experiences holds great potential for programs aiming to relax gender norms, catalyze agricultural innovation, and unlock faster transitions to gender equality and poverty reduction in the region. Nevertheless, challenging social norms can be risky and can result in backlash from family or other community members. To address this, collaborative research models offer promise. These approaches engage researchers and local women and men in action learning to build understanding of and support for inclusive agricultural change. Our research suggests that such interventions, which combine social, institutional and technical dimensions of agricultural innovation, can help diverse types of families to leave poverty behind.
