So, food systems are finally on the climate change map and embedded in the language of the Paris Climate Agreement.
This is a long way from the previous involvement of agriculture as a contentious area that was subject to fractious debate and fatally entwined with the discussion around climate-change related loss and damage. A vast majority of national plans to address climate change or Intended Nationally Determined Contributions (INDCs) presented at the COP in Paris contained language and commitments on agriculture – for both adaptation and mitigation measures.
What’s behind this change in sentiment and action?
Fifteen years ago, I started a new job in the Sindhupalchowk district in Central Nepal. I was working in the rural energy development section of the District Development Committee and supervised technical support for micro hydropower plants (MHPs) in the area.
My job also entailed reaching out to local communities and ensuring they were deeply involved, from installation to maintenance, in bringing micro hydro to their villages.
During my time in Sindhupalchowk, I witnessed firsthand the dramatic and positive changes hydro-powered electricity brought to people’s lives: houses lit up, radio and television sets came to life, mobile phones were easier to use, schools could run computer classes, small-scale enterprises flourished, and shops stayed open longer and offered more products. Moreover, the newly generated power contributed to improving the working conditions of women employed in local agro-processing mills as mechanical automation replaced labour-intensive manual processing.
In places like Bhuktangle, Parbat and Righa, Baglung, detailed feasibility studies and construction of MHPs had already been completed when the grid was extended to these areas. As a result, more than 50% of existing customers switched from their MHP-generated electricity services and the ensuing lower electricity usage made it difficult to pay off the loan that was taken out for the building of the plant. Ten districts in 2010 showed similar patterns as about 11% of MHPs are now competing with the national grid.
Once upon a time, there was a little boy named Bala who was born in a small village in Pavagada Taluk, Karnataka, where, agriculture was the main source of income—much like in many other villages in India. But as he grew up, he saw most of his friends choosing to move to cities, because scant rainfall had made it impossible to pursue agriculture and make enough money to make ends meet at home. Village elders turned to superstition to explain the phenomenon, while others blamed climate change for the drop in rainfall. Eventually, Bala also moved to the city of Bangalore, but always dreamed of bringing prosperity back to his village.
Looks like Bala’s dream will come true in 2016. Early next year, India’s Prime Minister Narendra Modi will break ground for one of the largest solar parks (2 GW) in the world—in Pavagada Taluk.
The successful conclusion of the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) negotiations has generated a lot of interest. While much of the discussion has focused on what the mega-regional trade agreement – the largest in a generation – means for environmental or labor standards, equally important are the regulatory standards on agricultural and food products known as Sanitary and Phytosanitary (SPS) measures, which are addressed in Chapter 7 of the agreement.
But how much do SPS standards really matter for trade?
Countries impose food safety standards for good reason, namely to protect the health of domestic consumers. However, domestic food safety standards often deviate from international ones. From an exporter’s point of view, such standards are likely to be seen as barriers to entry. Producers must modify production processes in order to meet each individual market’s product regulations, which raises the cost of the product for consumers. Economists and policy-makers are hungry for micro-level evidence on the effects of such standards on trade.
New World Bank Group research (Fernandes, Ferro, Wilson 2015) offers a first look at how a specific set of mandatory product standards—in this case, the maximum pesticide residue permitted on unprocessed food—impacts exporters. Novel firm-level data for exporters from 42 developing countries from 2006-2012 were analyzed along with data on pesticide standards for 243 agricultural and food products in 63 importing countries. We found that pesticide standards differ greatly across countries.
Emilienne Isenady poses while showing off the crops on her land in Lascahobas, Central Plateau, Haiti.
“If I knew that avocados had value, I would plant more of them,” says Emilienne Isenady, a single mother of six in Lascahobas, in the Central Plateau of Haiti.
Emilienne grows and sells avocados to Dominican buyers and to “Madan Saras” (the local name for women brokers who buy and re-sell products in other cities), who will buy the avocados and transport them using the perilous local “tap taps” – trucks converted into public transportation. She will also sell them in the local market in Lascahobas.
Emilienne is a smallholder farmer, but little does she know that she is already part of an avocado local value chain, nor that there is a better avocado Global Value Chain (GVC) out there facing a global shortage.
Emilienne’s is guiding us to see her avocado trees. As we push aside branches, we do not see neatly planted rows of avocado trees but rather a wild two hectares of scattered mango trees, avocado trees, malanga, sweet peas and pineapples. We are accompanied by Marc André Volcy, Farah Edmond and Jean-Berlin Bernard, three “mobile agents” of the Business Support Service team for the Central Plateau Department.
The team is part of a program that the Haitian Ministry of Commerce and Industry has put in place to support entrepreneurs in micro, small and medium-sized enterprises across the country. The program is supported by the World Bank Group’s Business Development and Investment Project (BDI). There are nine other teams just like them in the nine other departments of the country, all working simultaneously on different value-chain reinforcement initiatives (in such sectors as coffee, cocoa, mango, vetiver, honey and apparel).
Marc, Farah and Jean-Berlin live in the Central Plateau, enabling them to support the avocado producers directly, visiting them often and understanding the local political economy. The team has visited about 80 other smallholder farmers like Emilienne in their department, and has invited them to two public meetings and strategic working groups to present key challenges and opportunities for their avocado cluster. The Central Plateau team has carried out the competitive reinforcement initiative of the avocado cluster in their department with training and coaching financed by a grant from the Competitive Industries and Innovation Program (CIIP), through which they have received in-class training and coaching on how to carry out their field projects.
The Greater Mekong Sub-region (GMS) is a major global rice producer and exporter but its population suffers from serious levels of poverty and malnutrition.
Spanning six countries – China, Myanmar, Lao PDR, Thailand, Cambodia and Vietnam – the region is home to 334 million people. Nearly 60 million of them are involved in rice production, growing collectively over 44% of the world’s rice. All of the countries, except China, are net exporters of rice. This means they have more rice available than required for domestic consumption. Yet, nearly 15% of the population is seriously malnourished and about 40% of children under five are stunted, in other words, too short for their age as a result of under nutrition.
The mountain kingdom of Bhutan may not seem an obvious place to look for lessons on addressing climate change. But on a recent visit I was impressed with how much this small country has achieved and also with its ambition. Bhutan has much to teach South Asia and the wider world. These lessons are especially relevant as the world negotiates in Paris a new pact on climate change at the International Climate Change Summit, known as COP21, which we all hope will eventually move the global economy to a low carbon and more resilient path.
The talks aimed at agreeing a way to keep global warming to a maximum of 2 degrees Celsius from pre-industrial era levels. There is widespread agreement that going above this threshold would have serious consequences. South Asia is among the regions of the world that is likely to be most affected by climate change. We are already experiencing this. There is increasing variability of the monsoon rainfall, more heavy rainfalls such as those that caused the recent flooding in India, and an increase in the number of droughts.
A World Bank report in 2013 predicted that even if the warming climate was kept at 2 degrees then this could threaten the lives of millions of people in South Asia. The region's dense urban populations face extreme heat, flooding and diseases and millions of people could be trapped in poverty. Droughts could especially affect north-western India, Pakistan and Afghanistan.
These are big problems. They may look much bigger than anything Bhutan - a very small country in a populous region - can teach South Asia and the world. But I see three lessons. Firstly, a commitment to ambitious goals will be critical to save the world from climate disaster. To stop the world from warming too much, climate experts estimate that global greenhouse gas emissions must be cut by up to 70 percent by 2050. Carbon neutrality (zero emissions) must be achieved within this century.
For a small economy like Uruguay, integration into the global marketplace is one of the most powerful vehicles for growth and development. Participating actively in international trade allows Uruguayan firms to become more productive, by achieving economies of scale and by learning through exposure to international technologies, know-how and ideas.
How did Uruguayan firms perform, over the last 15 years, in the global marketplace?
Using the Trade Competitiveness Diagnostic Framework – which we presented today to the Uruguayan public and private sector – a World Bank team examined the performance of Uruguayan firms in global markets in terms of export growth, diversification, quality upgrading and survival;. The team presented a number of recommendations to increase integration and to gain from it.
The main findings of the report reveal the following:
Exports have grown fast thanks to favorable external conditions, but also due to the dynamism of the private sector, as well as to sound trade and investment policies.
Tailwinds due to high commodity prices helped export growth. Exports in gross and in value-added terms expanded at double-digit rates, and they expanded even faster among primary and resource-based products. The emblematic example is that of soybean exports, which stood at US$1.5 million in 2001 and which climbed to US$1.6 billion in 2014, making Uruguay an increasingly important player in the world market with a share of 3 percent of total exports.
But it wasn’t just tailwinds. The private sector was dynamic enough to seize the opportunity of favorable conditions and penetrate 46 new markets between 2000 and 2013. In just one product, beef, exporters gained access to 30 new destinations, and they secured higher prices in top-quality markets on the back of smart entrepreneurship, quality upgrading and a longstanding government strategy of negotiating market access for the sector. In services, for example, modern, knowledge-intensive sectors such as ICT and other business services also grew at double-digit rates, increasing the knowledge content of the export bundle.
This is the sixth in our series of posts by students on the job market this year.
The productivity of workers in agriculture is generally much lower than in other sectors of the economy (Gollin, Lagakos and Waugh, 2014). This is particularly true in low-income countries, yet these countries generally have the highest shares of the population living in rural areas and working in agriculture (McMillan et al, 2014). So why don’t workers switch jobs into higher productivity (and better paid) occupations? Development economists as far back as Lewis (1954) and Sen (1966) have studied the labor market imperfections that may keep workers in low productivity agriculture despite higher wages elsewhere.