An evaluation of Gates Foundation and agriculture

The Seattle Times (which one might consider Bill Gates’ local rag) has an interesting and to my mind well-balanced article that attempts to evaluate the Gates Foundation’s effort to support agricultural development in Africa. I’m not going to sum up the arguments here; there’s little point. I am, however, going to draw attention to two aspects of the article.

First, Rajiv Shah, the director of agriculture programs for the Gates Foundation, is “a young medical doctor with an economics degree and background in health policy”. He’s probably also stunningly bright and very able. But who is advising him, and how does he evaluate their advice?

Secondly, the article tells us that:

At a village in rural Uganda recently, Shah sat on the ground with a group of women readying large, round banana-tree bulbs for planting. A staple crop, the banana trees had been suffering from bacterial wilt that cut fruit harvests in half.

This is part of the search for permanent solutions, rather than Band-aid quick fixes, but the fact is, we know how to manage banana bacterial wilt. We really do, especially in the short and medium-term. So while breeding resistant varieties is one potential answer it is an answer to a not-very-urgent-or-important question. Is the Gates Foundation doing anything to help people manage banana bacterial wilt now? I don’t think so, and that’s why many people who are actually working on agricultural development in sub-Saharan Africa find some parts of AGRA and the Gates Foundation’s efforts to be just a little wide of the mark.

Dope

The answers are in, over at the World Bank’s discussion of its 2008 report Agriculture for Development. There’s a lot of good sense in the report author’s comments, such as the need for country (and region) specific approaches and the care that needs to be taken over commercialization, subsidies and the private sector. There are also some things one might take issue with. For example:

Vitamin A enhanced rice is an example of propoor technology under development which could save millions of lives. This will entail increasing support to public national and international research for crops grown and consumed largely by the poor, as well as strengthening capacity in biosafety evaluation and regulation.

I confess I am really, really amazed to find official World Bank support for this point of view. It is so much easier to boost vitamin A intake by broadening the diet to include orange fruits and vegetables and dark green leafy vegetables. One has to wonder why the World Bank continues to push this particular example of genetic modification when there are others that would be much more defensible if one really wanted to go down that route.

The response to a question about climate change had this to say:

The most urgent investments are in crop varieties tolerant to drought and heat, and irrigation systems. Also countries need to strengthen responses to increase volnerability through crop insurance schemes and safety nets.

New varieties may be part of the solution, but it may be considerably more effective to give farmers the access to a wider range of genetic variability and the capacity to make their own selections of widely adapted, and adaptable, populations in order to be able to cope with climate change. At least that should be tried. Properly.

I confess I wasn’t entirely satisfied with the pretty vague answer to my own question, about quick wins. But Luigi, who asked whether the Bank undervalues diversity in agricultural systems, will presumably be happy with part of the answer:

International support to the Global Crop Diversity Trust should be increased.

I wonder what made Byerlee think of that? The fact that the rest of his answer focuses on the conservation of genetic resources and the use of carbon financing to avoid deforestation? This the party line on the value of agricultural biodiversity: it is a source of traits for those clever breeders to use. True, but there is so much more that agrobiodiversity could deliver, given half a chance.

As we keep saying.

No dope

It is 16.21 hrs here in Rome, and there’s no sign of any activity over at the World Bank’s discussion. We know they had questions, and not just from us. They must have answers, surely. I can barely wait to get home and refresh my browser, again.

Get the straight dope from the horse’s mouth

We’ve been apprised, almost certainly by some sort of automated process, ((And I quote: “I saw your blog entry on agriculture, and I thought you might be interested either in highlighting this on your blog, or submitting a question yourself.”)) that the author of the World Bank’s 2008 World Development Report, which focused on agriculture, will take your questions in a live, thrusting, very web 2.0 effort later today. You can submit questions here. We have.

A shattered genebank slowly comes back to life

You may remember Typhoon Xangsane, which hit the Philippines in deadly fashion just over a year ago, on 28 September 2006.  It was given the Tagalog name Milenyo, or Millennium.

What you may not know is that one of the victims of Milenyo was the national genebank of the Philippines — the National Plant Genetic Resources Laboratory — which is housed by the Institute of Plant Breeding in Los Baños. ((The International Rice Research Institute (IRRI) is also in Los Baños, of course, but although some of its facilities were also affected by Milenyo, its genebank was not damaged.))

Some of the results of the typhoon can be seen in the photo essay published by GRAIN not long after the event. Some 70% of the national collection was declared lost and the rest taken next door to IRRI for emergency storage under “black box” conditions.

I visited the genebank last Friday, and the recovery has definitely made some progress, including as a result of some timely financial assistance by the Global Crop Diversity Trust. But there’s still some way to go: much of the collection is still at IRRI for safe keeping.

In this picture, Nestor, who works at the genebank, shows how high the water got on that fateful day. You can also see, closer to the ground, the mark left by the mud which flowed through the building.

dscf5364small.JPG

Continue reading “A shattered genebank slowly comes back to life”