Two misguided perceptions—prices are too low to justify investments in developing-country agriculture and economic development leads to the demise of root and tuber crops—continue to have severely negative impacts on the agricultural productivity of developing countries. These now-pervasive misperceptions began more than 20 years ago and have led to the continued low status afforded to agricultural research in the development strategies of donor organizations.

Of the many factors that have contributed to this neglect, perhaps foremost are the chronic surpluses in industrialized countries where agriculture is heavily protected. In such a climate, impact assessment can provide a much-needed tonic: not only is it a good business practice in times of shrinking budgets, but it can also serve to correct the view that agriculture as a sector is no longer competitive for government investment.

Because root and tuber crops are associated with starchy staples that were important in the past, they are often misperceived as having limited prospects for the future. Such inaccurate assessments greatly trouble those working in this field of research who warn that, relative to their great economic and nutritional importance, root and tuber crops are being ignored at the peril of those who need them the most. One factor that further frustrates their efforts is the serious paucity of information about roots and tuber crops as compared to the amount of information available about other commodities, particularly cereals.

Global commodity analysis can provide a healthy corrective and a firm foundation on which to base a renewed enthusiasm for supporting intensified research on roots and tubers, commodities that have been ignored for far too long. Such analysis also can serve to educate policy makers concerned about feeding the world’s growing population by informing them about how and why developing countries throughout Asia, Africa, and Latin America are coming to rely increasingly on root and tuber crops for food, feed, and income.

GOALS. This project primarily performs a much-needed service role by providing information to donors, research administrators, and agricultural scientists to assist in their decision making. In the grander scheme of things, it is foremost about redressing an almost universal ignorance about the many scientific, economic, and sociological issues that impact agricultural production. This lack of understanding has been historically damaging to CIP and other like-minded organizations whose mission it is to help stem the poverty and hunger plaguing those in the developing world and elsewhere.

IMPACT. Since 1992, researchers have made a concerted effort to document the practical impact of CIP-related technologies. Using a case study approach, researchers have been able to illustrate through a series of success stories just how effectively farmers have adopted and benefited from CIP-related technologies.

CIP, in partnership with various international programs, has utilized relatively simple appraisal techniques to assess the cost and benefits that have accrued in 13 specific instances. This collaborative approach to impact assessment reflects the mutual cooperation between CIP and its partners that is now the standard for most of the research conducted by the Center.

Estimates based on the 13 case studies have been useful in establishing boundary conditions for priority setting. The case study estimates have also been compiled into a spreadsheet format that provides more easily accessible information on returns to those donor organizations that have invested in CIP research since its founding in 1971.

Many challenges remain if CIP’s process of impact assessment is to be further refined and improved. The proven value of CIP research to resource-poor farmers and consumers in developing countries needs to be quantified as rigorously as possible. One helpful tool, suggest researchers, would be to distill CIP’s experience in impact assessment within a user-friendly manual for practitioners. With attractive returns to investing in CIP firmly established, the focus could then shift from historical case studies to more prospective assessments that would support decision making in such areas as technology design.

GLOBAL COMMODITY ANALYSIS. With help from economists at the CGIAR’s International Food Policy Research Institute, CIP researchers have estimated that the prospective demand and supply of root and tuber crops into the 21st century will equal or surpass the demand for cereals. Like impact assessment, global commodity analysis of root and tuber crops builds on research that has been evolving at CIP for over a decade.

Distribution of potatoes and sweetpotatoes in China.

This work includes the assembly of data and the publication of detailed maps on the global distribution of potatoes and sweetpotatoes. For example, it was found that in China potatoes are cultivated in 1,100 of 2,400 counties and are geographically concen-trated in the “highland” interior distant from the richer coast (see above).

Several major challenges remain for CIP scientists if they are to achieve the most effective techniques of global commodity analysis. Characterization of potato agro-ecologies for multilocation varietal testing remains a crucial priority. A web-based site on country-specific constraints to and opportunities for potato production also requires further refinement and development. Lastly, because root and tuber crops are bulky and difficult to transport, they are likely to be more affected by price risk than less perishable commodities. To address this problem, the incidence, consequences, and determinants of price risk need to be assessed so that cost-effective ways to reduce losses to society from episodic and cyclical overproduction can be developed.

For more information, please contact Keith Fuglie, Impact Enhancement Division Leader, Regional Office Indonesia, Kebun Percobaan Muara, Jalan Raya Ciapus, Bogor 16610, Indonesia, or at k.fuglie@cgiar.org