The Challenges of a Decision-Oriented, Multi-Sectoral Index

The Challenges of a Decision-Oriented, Multi-Sectoral Index

Tony Simons, Keith Shepherd, Tor Vagen, Ravi Prabhu, Anja Gassner and Mike Norton-Griffiths

World Agroforestry Centre (ICRAF), Kenya

1. Why is ATI needed?

2. Current State of Play

3. Evidence and Understanding

4. Agriculture - alone or with what?

5. Food for thought on ATI next steps

Decision-Oriented, Multi-sectoral Index

What is our collective dream for sustainable agriculture? and in how many generations?

1. Why is ATI needed? The justification:

• Agriculture is largest employer in the world • Largest single landuse in the world • Largest threat to natural ecosystems/natural capital • Human enterprise most vulnerable to climate change

• Since 1980, when sustainability term emerged, it has been aspirational but not very operational (why/what are okay - but how/where are not okay)

• Theory of Change for sustainability is vague, fluffy • Largely self-defined and self-monitored • Institutionalised by certifying bodies (which developing country has?) • Poor alignment of differentiated and unsustained boutique projects

Total World GDP = $72 trillion p.a. Agriculture GDP = $4.2 trillion p.a.

Economic costs of GHG emissions, loss of natural resources, loss of nature-based services such as carbon storage by forests, climate change

$4.7 trillion top 100 externalities

Latest TEEB Study released 15 April 2013

Nutrient loss (%) Nutrient loss (%) Nutrient loss (%)

Shifting agriculture (slash-and-burn)

Overall Rank

Sector Region Cost to Natural Capital

US$ billion

Revenue US$ billion

Impact Ratio

2 Cattle Ranching South America

312.1 16.6 18.7

4 Wheat Farming Southern Asia

214.4 31.8 6.7

13 Rice Farming North Africa

82.3 1.2 68.0

Top 100 Externalities of Business

1. Why is ATI needed? (cont.)

The competition:

• International Institute for Sustainable Development recorded 894 indicator initiatives for the monitoring of sustainable development (IISD, 2010)

• Unilever have been incorporating it in their supply chains since 1998

• Sustainable Agriculture Initiative (Nestle, DANONE, Unilever) in 2002

• Scientific Journal exists - Ecological Indicators (Elselvier)

• World Business Council on Sustainable Development (2000)

Unilever (since 1998)

1. Unilever Sustainable Agriculture Code (2010) (based on version 1 2006) - self-assessment tool for producers and suppliers - about good agricultural practices by producers

10 sustainability indicators developed through stakeholder consultation:

- soil fertility and health, soil loss, nutrients, pest management, biodiversity, product value, energy, water, social capital and local economy

Good in theory but they largely failed in Unilever’s own managers eyes as: Not responsive to change (can’t see the difference) Overly complex Too many correlated indicators Hard to compare across different contexts Hard to communicate with consumers But have helped drive changes in supplier behaviour (even more if incentives)

2. Upcoming Sustainable Supply Chain Guidelines - sustainable agriculture metrics in their supply chains

Alcohol Chicken

Ice-cream

Pet Food

Baby Food Chocolate Jams Roots and Tubers

Baked Goods Dairy Products Juices Shellfish

Beef Eggs Lamb Soda

Canned Soup Fish Margarines, oils Sugar

Cereal Goods Fruit Nuts Vegetables

Walmart Sustainable Supply Initiative ($380 billion p.a.)

The ‘Sustainable Agriculture’ indicator evaluates developed and developing countries support for sustainable agriculture. It captures a snapshot view of three dimensions required to ensure populations do not go hungry: (1) Sufficiency of financial commitment to agriculture (budgets, aid).

(2) Appropriateness of policies to support low input, climate-resilient sustainable agriculture. (3) women’s access to land.

ActionAid (2010)

http://www.actionaid.org.uk/doc_lib/scorecard.pdf

GUESS THE TOP 3 COUNTRIES

ReviewoftheEvidenceonIndicators,MetricsandMonitoringSystems

Commissioned by the UK Department for International Development (DFID)

Conducted by the CGIAR Program on Water, Land & Ecosystems

Coordinated by the World Agroforestry Centre (ICRAF)

Authors: Keith D Shepherd1, Andrew Farrow2, Claudia Ringler3, Anja Gassner1, Devra Jarvis4

1 World Agroforestry Centre (ICRAF) 2 Consultant for World Agroforestry Centre (ICRAF) 3 International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI) 4 Bioversity International

2. Current State of Play

103 monitoring initiatives reviewed on sustainable intensification of agriculture (ICRAF/DFID)

Common Weaknesses:

• Lack of conceptual framework • Absence of clearly defined objectives of monitoring • Undefined target geography or demography • Inadequate scale hierarchy • Poor sampling theory • Low ability to disaggregate (gender) • Lack integration of biophysical and socio-economic • Poor sample strata • Lack of consistency in measurement protocols • Low attribution of interventions to outcomes (means to end Framework) • Little consideration of uncertainty • No trade-off analyses • Data sharing agreements wanting • No cost-effectiveness analysis of monitoring • Few initiatives sustained over time (institutional sustainability)

Purpose of Measurement

Then we studied selected group of 24 initiatives

None had explicit purpose to take decisions

Unit of Analysis

Frequency of Measurement

most were Quick and Dirty

a few were Slow and Clean

none were Quick and Clean

Acknowledgement must avoid Slow and Dirty

but little distinction between

“Need to know” and “Nice to know”

3. Evidence and Understanding

• Focus on populations not individuals

• Interventions designed on prevalence & incidence of problems/risks

• Use standardised protocols

• Operational surveillance systems assume status and risk are

continuous processes

Allow investment choices to be prioritised between issues such as:

Lung cancer HIV/AIDS Malnourishment Road safety

Public Health

Public Health Systems

Cardiovascular disease

Utilise research that shows three risk factors account 75% of heart disease

Smoking High blood pressure Cholesterol

focus on these for interventions and monitoring

Basic problem

There is a lack of coherent and rigorous sampling and assessment frameworks that enable comparison of data (i.e. meta-studies) across a wide range of environmental conditions ... and scales

Quantification and systematic monitoring are essential to understand and manage trade-offs among productivity and ecosystem services, and know where are the tipping points

Surveillance science Land health metrics

Consistent field protocol

Soil spectroscopy Coupling with remote sensing Prevalence, Risk factors, Digital mapping

Sentinel sites Randomized sampling schemes

Soil maps generally static Coarse resolution Don’t reflect functional properties of the soil

Ethiopia soil map

GeoScience

But what does it mean? and how can we use it?

10km

Soil Carbon (30m x 30m)

Can guide better decisions

http://geoportal.worldagroforestry.org/

Co-locate and integrate demographic and socio-economic data Health Sector leads (Indepth Network)

Adjudicated under the Land Adjudication Act CAP 284 1968, intensive smallholder cultivation with clear freehold title

Tenure effects on land productivity and investment

Un-adjudicated land:

no firm legal title

Norton-Griffith, in preparation

38

Overall, the economic and environmental gains from secure tenure are substantial …..

Impact Unadj Freehold Tenure

Effect

Net Returns to Land ($ ha-1 y-1) $198 $397 2.0

Tree Crops (ha km2) 2.3 12.9 5.6

Plantations and Woodlots (ha km2) 3.1 12.7 4.1

Hedgerows (km km-2) 5.2 23.6 4.5

Agricultural Intensity 1983 2013

The development trajectory of unadjudicated is 40 years behind that of adjudicated land

Natural Forest

4.1 billion ha

Crop Land

1.5 billion ha

Tree Plantations

0.3 billion ha

Pasture & Rangelands

3.4 billion ha

Wetlands

1.3 billion ha

Deserts

1.9 billion ha

Natural Forest

4.1 billion ha

Crop Land

1.5 billion ha

Pasture & Rangelands

3.4 billion ha

Wetlands

1.3 billion ha

Deserts

1.9 billion ha

4. Agriculture – alone or with what?

Urban Areas

Natural Forest

4.1 billion ha

Crop Land

1.5 billion ha

Pasture & Rangelands

3.4 billion ha

Wetlands

1.3 billion ha

Deserts

1.9 billion ha

Global Land Area - proportional

Agriculture

Forestry

Environment

What is best way to optimise goals?

• Productivity/Income • Sequestration/Mitigation • Reduced emissions • Resilience/Adaptation • Environmental Goods/Services

CSA REDD+

PES

What scale?

ISSUE Small-holder

Farmer Local Level

Sub-national District

National Level

Scale field/farm/forest

plot village/watershed County/District Country

Area 0.1 - 50 ha 1000's ha 10,000's ha 100,000's ha

Landscape Actors Small-holders Communities District Officials Govt Policymakers

Jurisdiction/tenure Often weak Mixed Strong Total

Actor Interest

Productivity High Moderate Moderate High

Carbon stocks Little Little Little Moderate

WB/WUE Moderate Moderate Little Little

Diversity Moderate Little Little Little

Strength Instit. Moderate High Moderate Little

Needs

Technologies Practices

Inputs Access to Credit

Materials Buyers Advice

Land Tenure Access Rights

Organised Farmers Functioning

Markets Low Conflict

Demonstrations Suppliers Byelaws

Manag. Rights

Landuse Control Tax Revenues

District Legislation Central Govt

Support

Tax Revenues Policies

Analyses Evidence Baselines

Monitoring Int. collaboration

Aspirations survival, self determination, more power/influence,

better infrastructure, greater HDI

The Landscape Approach to Development

eastern

western

Fort Tenan

Participatory Assessment of Current and Potential Climate

Smart Practices

Awareness Raising, Capacity Development and Demonstrations

Introduction or testing of Climate Smart Practices

Baseline Measurement and Monitoring of

Land Health

Greenhouse Gases

Using and Improving Predictive Tools for

Potential Impact

Increasing Productivity

Reducing Environmental

Footprint

FAO MICCA Project

Linkages between adaptation and mitigation

Improved carbon sink management

[M] Minimized deforestation and forest degradation

[M]

Improved adaptive capacity of the society

[A]

Diminished release of GHG to the

Atmosphere [M]

Improved livelihood [A]

Sustainable forest

management [M]

Reduced loss of soil carbon stock

[M]

Enhances carbon sinks [M]

Afforestation and reforestation [M]

Biodiversity conservation [A]

Agroforestry [M] [A]

Soil and water conservation [A]

Better landscape management [M] [A]

Improved agricultural

productivity [A]

Enhanced ecosystem services and goods

availability [A]

Sentinel Landscapes 2013 • Data & Research Method sharing

platform to catalyze the emergence of a more coordinated and collaborative research approach across landscapes

• Stimulus for new research ideas forming the basis for new CRP6 operational plans

• Awareness of benefits of “high-value data sets”

Open access data archive: http://dvn.iq.harvard.edu/dvn/dv/crp6/

Data Management & Sharing documents developed

• RESEARCH DATA ARCHIVAL

GUIDELINES, • CS PRO MANUAL • DATAVERSE CATALOGING

INFORMATION FORM • DATAVERSE MANUAL FOR

CREATING AND UPLOADING STUDIES

• RESEARCH DATA MANAGEMENT TRAINING MANUAL

• DATA MANAGMENTFQ • GUIDELINES FOR SHARING

DATA IN SENTINEL LANDSCAPES

• RESEARCH DATA MANAGEMENT POLICY DEVELOPED BOTH FOR ICRAF AND CIFOR

17 databases submitted and shared

Profitable agriculture

Subsistence agriculture + safety nets

Pre-commercial agriculture

Subsistence agriculture

Sustainable (small-holder) agriculture

Use of Interventions:

Use of Interventions:

5. Food for thought on ATI next steps

Crop rotation Growing legume crops Growing cover crops Fallowing in some cases Using animal manure (??) Proper use of pesticides Proper use of inorganic fertilisers Low tillage systems Not burning the residues Soil erosion control measures Good use irrigation and water

Lots of good things we know we should be doing

Forecast Rank (and spank) Identify Test Target Design Evaluate Monitor interventions Description of systems, situational analysis Prioritise investments

(Value for money metrics for measuring agriculture, ecosystem and poverty and nutritional outcomes)

Utility of ATI

SAI Benchmarking Report (2009)

Power of the Single Number

Measurement Magnitude

Dimensions (units)

Uncertainty

Required Features of ATI

1. Sound conceptual framework, clarity of goals

2. Broad ownership, agreed terminology, universal indicator set

3. Actionable (Decisions, Practices)

4. Rigorous data collection and analyses (uncertainty)

5. Credible, reliable and accurate

6. Accessible, customisable, allow tradeoffs scenarios, subjectivity

7. Easy to interpret

8. Free from manipulation, independently verifiable

9. Enduring and financially supported

10.Evolve with new evidence

PURPOSES SCALE

Global National Sub-national Local

1. Awareness, advocacy and transparency *** *** ** *

2. Alignment Goals, Standards, Methods ** *** * *

3. Identify and mitigate risks, constraints *** *** ** **

4. Benchmarking and ranking *** *** **

5. Formulation and reform policies * *** ** **

6. Prioritise allocations, investment, actions ** *** *** **

7. Target and monitor interventions ** *** *** **

8. Report outcomes and impacts (VFM) *** ** **

PURPOSES ACTOR

Donors

Govts

Private Sector

NGOs CBOs

Farmers

Public/ Consumr

1 Awareness,advocacy and transparency

*** ** *** ** *

2 Alignment Goals, Standards, Methods ** *** * * * *

3 Identify and mitigate risks, constraints

** *** *** ** **

4 Benchmarking and ranking

*** *** ** *

5 Formulation and reform policies

* *** ** ** ** *

6 Prioritise allocations, investment, actions

** *** *** * **

7 Target and monitor interventions

** *** ** **

8 Report outcomes and impacts (VFM)

*** ** ** * *

ATI Sub-indicies

1. Agribusiness/Policy (BBA)

2. Productivity and Nutrivity

3. Profitability, ROI

4. Agroecosystem Health (soil, water, biodiversity, carbon, pollution)

5. Social inclusion (gender, youth, poor)/Capacity

Indicators

1. Existing and new

2. Predictive and responsive

3. Quantitative, qualitative (relative/filter)

4. Direct and proxy measures

5. Will evolve over time

6. May we weighted differently by some groups

ATI – the most promising initiative

ATI – the most promising initiative

Theory of Change

Change of Theory

QUICK and CLEAN

Private Sector Dialogue - Metrics of Sustainable Agriculture 17-18 September 2013, ICRAF, Kenya

MARS, DANONE, Nestle, Unilever, Louis Dreyfus IFAD, CTA