Agricultural Innovation Systems: Examples from outside Europe

Transcription

1 Agricultural Innovation Systems: Examples from outside Europe Catherine Moreddu Trade and Agriculture Directorate The future of AKIS in Europe Joint SCAR Solinsa Conference Brussels, 5 March 2012

2 Outline Challenges for agricultural innovation systems Agricultural R&D institutions and expenditures Overview of agricultural innovation systems in selected non EU OECD countries and emerging economies OECD on going and future work on Agricultural Innovation Systems OECD Trade & Agriculture Directorate 2

3 Challenges for innovation systems Need for long term vision (long innovation pipeline; increased uncertainties with climate change; long term food security): Foresight exercises More complex issues requiring multidisciplinary l approaches Non agricultural innovation affects the agri food sector More integration, cooperation, sharing of information, but competition and IPR are strengthened Better define the role of the government Competitive funding favours short term projects: need to find the right balance Improving adoption by producers (advisory services; market integration; risk management; investment in agriculture and general services) Acceptance by consumers is crucial Need to renew the skillbase in science, attract young entrants and retrain staff Policy coherence is important Evaluation of AKIS performance benchmarking OECD Trade & Agriculture Directorate 3

4 Overview of Agricultural Innovation Systems Higher education: dominated by public, often regional, universities, but someprivate funding; agricultural specific universities or agricultural departments in general universities, under education ministry; more applied, public and private, technical schools. R&D: public R&D mainly in research institutes under ministry for agriculture or for S&T, environment or health; often national (federal) funding, while research inuniversitiesisfunded is byregional government (Canada, Mexico, US). Part of funds as basic, others through projects, often with matching funds (Australia, Canada, Chile, NZ), competitive funding or not, competition withinagriculture or broader (Chile, NZ). Extension: Large diversity, generally regional and local, very diverse actors: public, education, upstream and downstream industries, NGOs, consultants, farmers organisations; Public funds to public or private institutions providing the service and/or to farmers for accessing the service, co financing by farmers collectively (levies and taxes) or individually. Various types of services including implementation of policies. OECD Trade & Agriculture Directorate 4

5 Expenditures on agricultural R&D Various intensity of public expenditures by country Trends are not clear: level versus intensity? Little evidence on private expenditures but they seem to increase in developed countries in some areas with obvious market returns Development of private public partnerships Private expenditures negligible gg in developing countries Lack of (comparable) data at OECD level Lack of detailed ddt data, e.g. by topic OECD Trade & Agriculture Directorate 5

6 Public agricultural R&D intensity Ag share in GDP Ag Share in exports Share of ag R&D in ag GDP Australia 2.5% 13% 2.4% (private 1%) Brazil 5.9% 36% 1% Chile 3.9% 16% 1.3% China 10.3% 2.4% 0.5% Japan 14% 1.4% 05% 0.5% 3% Korea 2.6% 0.9% 1.2% (private 0.7%) Mexico 3.9% 7% 1.2% (private 0.1%) New Zealand 5.5% 53% 2.5% South Africa 3.0% 10% 2.8% US 1.4% 10% >4% Most developing countries <0.5% OECD Trade & Agriculture Directorate 6

7 Public agricultural R&D intensity: Trends Australia Iceland Japan Korea Spain Switzerland United States Source: OECD, R&D database OECD Trade & Agriculture Directorate 7

8 Why? improve responsiveness to demand Increase adoption Save resources and leverage private funds Improve policy coherence? Recent reforms How? Improving coordination/evaluation Creating national and international networks Consolidation/integration of institutions Encouraging public/private partnerships More funds through competitive grants, matchinggrants grants, consortia Reform of agricultural education More diverse and competitive supply of farm extension Greater involvement of users in problem definition and finding solution OECD Trade & Agriculture Directorate 8

9 Various aspects in selected countries Programming Coordination Priorities Funding mechanisms National cooperation International cooperation Higher education Extension and advisory systems Evaluation OECD Trade & Agriculture Directorate 9

10 Programming Coordination, non EU OECD Australia: Development of A National Primary Industries R&D and Extension Framework (2009) with all stakeholders (National and State govt, CSIRO, RDC, Council of Deans) under the auspices of the Primary Industries Ministerial Council. Canada: AAFC has a central and strategic role. AAFC Strategic plan: Growing Forward ( ). Coordination with Health Canada, Environment Canada, National Research Council bilaterally and through the Assistant Deputy Minister S&T IntegrationBoard Board. NationalSciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada: Since 2011, food and agriculture no longer a target, but included in environment and natural resources. Chile: NationalInnovation Council and Government Committee. MINAGRI executes but does not have an innovation strategy for agriculture. Competitive funds (mid 1990s), one agricultural specific. Japan: MAFF formulates objectives, coordinates, evaluates and provides funds to its research centres, local governments and private sector. 10 year Basic Plan for AFF Research including priority goals and performance targets (5 years). Mexico: National Council of Science and Technology (CONACYT) plans and manage innovation policy. Collaborates with ministries i i for sector funds (here SAGARPA). New Zealand: Ministry of Science and Innovation provides policy advice and distributes funds. Agricultural competes with other sectors. Focus on partnerships to encourage market led innovation and research. Future focus on knowledge and technology transfer. OECD Trade & Agriculture Directorate 10

11 Coordination, emerging economies Brazil: System of Agricultural Research and Innovation organises, coordinates and implements research. Embrapa dominates ag R&D. It is semi autonomous federal agency (public corporation) under Ministry of Agricultural cutu and Food Supply. Embrapa bapauses strategic planning pa gand foresight. Central decision and decentralised execution, by specialised research centres, by product or themes. Two tier Federal and State based agencies. Indonesia: Indonesian Agency for Agricultural R&D in charge of research. Agricultural Research Committee does strategic planning. Assessment of results by Assessment Institute for Agricultural Technology (AIAT) also in charge of technology transfer (development model and technical implementation) OECD Trade & Agriculture Directorate 11

12 Priorities, non EU OECD Australia: productivity and profitability, integration to markets (consumers), natural resources, climate change, biosecurity, innovation skills and technology Canada: enhancing competitiveness and profitability. New value chains. Chile: Action plan for agricultural innovation systems to 2030 (WB). Chile benefited from technologies developed for California. It needs to strengthen th its own ag innovation system (higher h competition, climate change, stronger IPR). Emphasis on food safety and quality, information and human resources in the value chain. New Zealand: encourage market led innovation. Export driven economic growth and sustainable management of resources. Research to underpin policy. OECD Trade & Agriculture Directorate 12

13 Priorities in non OECD countries Brazil: Embrapa traditionally focused on short term goals and paid attention to the dissemination of results. Wide array of topics to help agri food business. Now more attention to sustainability, climate change ge(oesg (foresight), t),product differentiation, e tato nutritious t and dsafe food, and renewable energy and other industrial use of ag commodities. Indonesia: Research for Development rather than R&D. More attention to users demand. A prominent objective in developing and emerging economies is to improve agricultural productivity sustainably, includingin small family farms, to pursue global food security (G20 mandate) OECD Trade & Agriculture Directorate 13

14 Funding mechanisms Australia: National and state governments fund 75% of rural R&D. Industry levies also fund research agencies (RDC) Canada: AAFC has 19 Research centres (CAD 316 M). Provinces funds research in universities stesand dtechnological og ca organisations. oga sato s Growing Go Forward ( ) includes 2 Innovation programs: Growing Canadian Agri Innovation Program co funds collaborative projects (CAD 68 M) ; DevelopingInnovativeAgri Products (DIAP) Initiativesupports industry led projects (CAD 41 M). Chile: MINAGRI funds personnel and administrative costs of Public Technological Institutes (Transfer agreement); Research contracts; Large reliance on competitive funding. Levy on mining industry. New Zealand: 50% of CRI funding by government. Increasing amounts through partnerships (matching funds 50 50). Higher share of basic funding for longer term research in the future. Private funding through compulsory industry levies and a private trust. OECD Trade & Agriculture Directorate 14

15 National cooperation Research partnership projects: e.g. Primary Growth Partnership (PGP) schemes in NZL; DIAP and science clusters in Canada, Transversal Projects in Mexico (food security, arid zones, sustainable modernisation). Centres of research excellence (Chile, NZ). Agencies: COFUPRO in Mexico (National Coordinator for Produce Foundations, established as part of ALIANZA program) is a non gov organisation, which provides networks, coordination, strategic planning, studies and exchange of experiences. Consortia (NZ) Networks: Food Innovation Network of New Zealand (FINNZ) provides open access plan facilities for smaller companies through regional hubs with equipment to support R&D and technical support. Consolidation of national agencies (CRI in NZ). OECD Trade & Agriculture Directorate 15

16 International Networks The Global Research Alliance on Agricultural Greenhouse Gases (2009): New Zealand initiative, 32 partner countries, 3 research groups: Livestock (NZL+NLD), Paddy Rice (JPN+URG) and Cropland (US) 2 cross cutting groups (soil carbon and nitrogen (FRA+AUS) and inventories and measurement (CAN+NLD) The Knowledge Based Bio Economy (KBBE) Forum: Science and Technology Cooperation Agreement between NewZealand and the EU Commission in KBBE Forum with Australia and Canada. Enhance policy dialogue and scientific co operation. Food, agriculture and biotechnology is a priority. i 4 themes: food and health (AUS); non food bio based products (Canada), sustainable agriculture (NZL); fisheries and aquaculture (EU). Second KBBE meeting in Ottawa, 5 6 October 2011 INOVAGRO (2011): Latin America + Spain (COFUPRO IICA) in/ OECD Trade & Agriculture Directorate 16

17 2009 CGIAR reform To strengthen coordination and governance; facilitate collaboration, stabilise and support the growth of core resources. Strategic objectives: reduce rural poverty; increase food security, improve nutrition and health, ensure more sustainable management of naturall resources. OECD Trade & Agriculture Directorate 17

18 Labex Virtual Laboratory to exchange of information, material (bio) and personnel between research organisations.. Developed by Embrapa in 1998, in partnership with the ARS USDA Labex Europe created in Montpellier, then Netherlands and the UK Extended to Asia in 2009 in partnership with the RD Administration in Korea Embrapa also deploys researchers (andtransfers technology) in less developed countries (Ghana and various Latin American countries) OECD Trade & Agriculture Directorate 18

19 Higher education Demand driven courses in New Zealand. Reform of State Universities in India: modernise administration, update curriculum, pedagogyand and learning material. Autonomous EARTH universities in Costa Rica mixes academic work and practical experience. Vocational agricultural education in Egypt introduced practical training and developed skills such as problem solving, critical thinking and decision making. OECD Trade & Agriculture Directorate 19

20 Trends in extension and advisory systems Larger range of objectives and demands (environment, regulations, project plans to obtain funds), and to the diversity of farmers and local situations. Extensionists need better education and stronger and more diverse technical skills. Delivery and priority setting at local level, but often national funds Governments withdrew from the provision of the service (except in Japan) Governments either fund specialised agents such as universities or private firms (Mexico); or pay (small) farmers to access those services (Chile, NZL, Australia, mainly in Canada) Various degree of industry co financing. Information systems (India, Indonesia) In developing countries, technology adoption often involves input and investment support. OECD Trade & Agriculture Directorate 20

21 Evaluation Programming plans with targets (Japan) Publication of net returns (Australia, Embrapa, Brazil) Independent reviews and evaluation of impacts (Regular for Embrapa, ad hoc Chile, Mexico) Indonesia: Assessment Institute for Agricultural Technology (AIAT) assesses research results, follows implementation and gets feed back from users. Evaluation of projects Number of publications and patents Lack of data on agricultural R&D expenditures Mechanisms for prioritisation not clearly explained OECD Trade & Agriculture Directorate 21

22 OECD on going and future work on innovation 2010 Ministerial meeting Project on Innovation Systems AKS conference, Paris, June g /p / Framework report Country case studies Themes: Partnerships: What can government do to make them work performance evaluation and benchmarking G20 on improving agricultural productivity sustainably Link to Green growth and climate change, Food security? Science and technology: Innovation Policy, indicators, Governance of Innovation Systems (2005), Innovation Strategy (2010) OECD Trade & Agriculture Directorate 22

23 Thank You Trade and Agriculture Directorate Visit our PSE/CSE website: Contact us: OECD Trade & Agriculture Directorate 23

24 Background: OECD Innovation Strategy R&D institutions Institutions for knowledge production and policy analysis are often linked to specific ministries and domains: this may reinforce a segmented culture and make it more difficult to produce coherent, policy relevant knowledge Short/long term Public research to enhance excellence and create better links to other innovators and stakeholders More autonomy in funding public research to facilitate cooperation with private sector and multidisciplinary approaches, and respond to industry needs Competitive funding through projects Improve technology transfers: remove obstacles to co operation, foster international co operation, networks: need to define clear rules Improve measurement, evaluation: comprehensive data infrastructure (Oslo manual): need for monitoring and reporting systems, benchmarking Define best practices OECD Trade & Agriculture Directorate 24

25 Background: Policy principles for innovation Empowering people to innovate: education and training, entrepreneurial culture, consumers Unleashing innovations: competition; mobilise private funding, open market, culture of creativity, risk taking Creating and applying knowledge: public investment in research, coherence between sources of funding, knowledge infrastructure, regulatory framework, knowledge flow and networking Applying innovation to address global and social challenges: scientific and technological cooperation and technology transfers, predictable policy regime, innovation as a tool for development (here agriculture is mentioned) Improving the governance and measurement of policies i for innovation: policy coherence by treating innovation as a central component of government policy, evidence based decision making, co ordination at local, regional and national level. OECD Trade & Agriculture Directorate 25

26 Institutional trends in agricultural AKS Consolidation to create regional poles grouping various institutions (Centres for excellence in NZL) Consolidation of research centres (NZL) Stronger link between elements of the AKS Stronger links with other sectors, e.g. health, veterinary, environment, water, RD Reforms of agricultural education to make it closer to market demand (NZL: definition of courses; India) Increasing private research, but public funds still important New institutions: tions Innovation ationagencies, networks Links research government: Increased demand from policy makers (evidence based policies, accountability, evaluation); statutoryor through projects Stronger private/public integration, including through projects Evaluation of AKS performance: strategic plans, accountability OECD Trade & Agriculture Directorate 26

27 Proposals for a Mexican agricultural extension service (1) Segregation of the service: commercialfarmers who are responsible for theirown technology and information needs, organized small and medium farmers who have potential for incorporation intoproductivechains chains, and subsistence farmers who are the subject of a service based on household welfare. At the Federal level, policy, financing, regulation and evaluation are brought under the one body, with management of resources at the state level by farmers for both research and extension to strengthen linkages. At the state level, service managed by the farmer organizations and local lgovernment, with increased emphasis on accountability and increased funding coming from states, municipalities and farmers. Mexico - Review of Agricultural Extension OECD Trade & Agriculture Directorate 27

28 Proposals for a Mexican agricultural extension service (2) Strengthening the research component of the system by allowing the institutes to develop strategic research programs as well as have technology transfers and training programs that link them to extension and the farming community. Strengthening core funding to allow Mexican institutions build solid research programs and give them access to global research, technology and innovation. The proposed innovation system will be integrated and will have increased farmer control and increased funding at the local level Mexico - Review of Agricultural Extension OECD Trade & Agriculture Directorate 28