Quantitative Priority Setting (QPS) for the CGIAR - Gerald C. Nelson
1 like239 views
This document discusses quantitative priority setting (QPS) for the CGIAR to identify high-value activities, opportunities to increase efficient use of resources, and whether funding is sufficient. It proposes a methodology involving standardized technology evaluation templates, modeling suites, and metrics. Key points include developing common templates and models, quantitatively evaluating technologies and CRP targets, improving existing models, and identifying priority areas for tool development by specialized centers and CRPs to guide funding allocation decisions across the CGIAR. It also emphasizes the importance of identifying the right goals through a global stakeholder process that monitors progress and proposes priority changes over time.
Quantitative Priority Setting (QPS) for the CGIAR - Gerald C. Nelson
- 1. Quantitative Priority Setting (QPS) for the CGIAR Gerald C. Nelson May 2016 ISPC May 26, 2016 CIP Headquarters, Lima, Peru
- 2. What is QPS? • A process to identify… – CGIAR activities of highest value – Opportunities to increase efficient use of resources – Whether funding is sufficient • A critical piece of a monitoring and review system – Ex-ante, en-passant, ex post
- 3. Why Do QPS for the CGIAR? • Funders are demanding this • Center managers and scientists need guidance on priority setting for investments • National program partners demand this so they can better see benefits of CG collaboration • Current resources are limited and future budget growth is uncertain • The QPS is likely to demonstrate high returns for more resources
- 4. First things first • Goals determine priorities – Does the SRF identify the right goals? • Priorities for CGIAR activities are influenced by – Goals • Do we have the right goals? – Capacities of the CGIAR (human, capital, spatial, institutional) • Do we have a good catalog of these? – Who’s doing what (IARCs, NARS, private sector) • Do we have a good inventory of the other actors and their activities?
- 5. Elements of QPS • Standardization of process. Common … – Template for detailed, quantitative technology description – Modeling environment, using suite of models – Set of metrics • Explicit recognition and identification of limits
- 6. Proposed methodology step 1, common template for technology evaluation • Prepare a three level template for use by CRPs/Centers to assess ROI for a new ‘technology’ – Innovator – technical nature of new technology, cost and time frame for development; partners – Adaptor – cost and time frame for modification for local use, who is adaptor (public/private/NGOs), by location – Disseminator – cost and time frame for adoption, rate of update, who is disseminator (public/private sector), by location • Much of this information contained in CRP proposals – See CGIAR Template Description V3.docx
- 7. Proposed methodology step 2: Standardized evaluation of proposed technology • Use common modeling suite and data – Climate data from selected GCMs – Hydrology and water supply/demand models – DSSAT crop modeling suite with consistent soil data – IMPACT – Links to CGE (Globe model) • Use standard qualitative scenarios and quantitative components – CMIP5 climate/weather data – SSP GDP and population data • Develop and use agreed quantitative metrics
- 8. Why Global Futures? • Has already developed many of needed tools – Detailed modeling suite with all CGIAR mandate crops/animals – Use of climate/SSP data – Some metrics already developed (e.g. ROI, share of population at risk of malnutrition) • Partnership with all CGIAR centers
- 9. Financial quantitative metrics from the IMPACT modeling suite • Financial return on investment – Internal rate of return – Net present value – Benefit cost ratio
- 10. Quantitative metrics from the IMPACT modeling suite • Investment-quantitative output ratios, average and marginal, such as – Adoption rates and yield increases ($ per household adopting improved technologies) – GHG emissions reductions ($ per MT reduction from baseline) – Water use quantity ($ per MT reduction from baseline) and quality ($ per MT reduction in nitrogen loading) – Share of nutrient requirement met • Baselines and results are spatially and temporally disaggregated.
- 11. SRF Aspirational Target 1.1 and Quantitative metric results Amount needed (million $) Target Contribution million households) $ per household Total 919.2 196.9 4.7 A4NH 160.7 20.5 7.9 CCAFS 53.8 11.0 4.9 DCLAS 75.0 25.0 3.0 Fish 27.6 4.9 5.6 FTA 75.8 41.0 1.8 Livestock 35.8 6.5 5.5 Maize 119.3 15.0 8.0 PIM 100.0 10.0 10.0 Rice 17.0 16.5 1.0 RTB 134.1 8.0 16.8 Wheat 34.9 17.5 2.0 WLE 85.2 21.0 4.1 100 million more farm households have adopted improved varieties, breeds or trees, and / or improved management practices by 2022 These results are not comparable!
- 12. Concerns about the approach • General – its not able to capture relevant benefits of investment; e.g., – NRM research benefits – Fish and livestock research benefits – Policy research benefits • Missing elements of modeling – Focus on the most important ones first
- 13. Improvements to modelling suite needed • Incorporate variability • Improve existing metrics (kcals, share of malnourished) and add new ones (nutritional detail, etc.) • Multiple consuming households (e.g., low and high incomes; urban and rural) • Update/improve trade distortion parameters • Improve demand parameters
- 14. Where should development of QPS elements be done, and how used? • Standardized tools and processes – Developed by individual centers/CRPs/outside experts – Implemented and supported by consortium • Identification of potential biological and management technologies – By biological scientists inside and outside CGIAR • Tools use should guide funding allocation decisions at – CGIAR – CRP – Center
- 15. Examples of tools improvements by specialists • Climate change effects on agro-ecological zones by CCAFS (climate analogue tool) • Nutritional details by A4NH (e.g. food group and nutritional adequacy definitions) • Water use efficiency by WLE • Global economic model improvements by PIM/IFPRI
- 16. Back to the beginning: Who identifies goals? • Need a global process that – Involves stakeholders from all walks of life – Monitors progress – Proposes changes in priorities over time