Can less data be better data?

The costs, benefits, and issues related to a less expansive data strategy

Gary Eilerts, USAID FEWS NETCRED Workshop, June 9, 2011

FEWS NET:• Works in conflict environments• Provides early warning coverage of 30+

countries• Food security focus requires multiple data

streams and baselines

• Favors accuracy over precision• Accepts quick and dirty• Must inform large resource decisions• Is 25 years old• Fights every year for funding – needs to show

results

See www.fews.net

“FEWS NET has a data strategy…?”a skeptic, some years ago

weathnutri

agricu

The FEWS NET retort:

“Of course we have a strategy!”

demographic data

nutritional data weather

data

price data agricultural

data

livelihoods information

The strategy…

“What data do we need?”

The automatic answer:

“Anything that is related to our primary mission (needs)”

Many partial datasets, many partially answered questions, too much spent on both…

and the need for a new strategy…

The results?

FROM Everything we need to know to answer any question about ag production in country x’s food security:

main seasonarea planted: maizeyield: maizearea trend over time: maizeyield trend over time: maizepoor year area planted: maizegood year area planted: maizearea planted: sorghumyield: sorghumetc.

TO: What do we need to be certain enough…

if main season agricultural production is vastly above, below, or near average in country X…

and what general impact it may have on that country’s food security?

Is an alternate strategy feasible (more specific questions, smaller in scope)…??

Real Example:

Need: sufficient information about food availability prospects in country X

If: Biggest and most significant uncertainty in the production equation for country X is “area planted”If: Wheat production counts for >70% of country’s food availability

Then: can we get most of what we need with a good-enough area planted estimate?

Province Total Crop Std. Error Irrigated Rainfed CFSAM

(km2) (km2) (km2) (km2) (km2) (km2)Badakhshan 4573 2069 95 87 1983 1350Badghis 5065 2780 102 117 2663 1230Baghlan 3361 1516 75 424 1093 1340Balkh 6619 1954 127 1133 821 2470Faryab 7643 4024 143 417 3607 2320Hirat 6353 3325 123 1345 1980 2370Jawzjan 2828 1237 66 778 459 1600Kunduz 2357 1274 59 974 300 1130Samangan 4155 2074 88 46 2027 1460Sari Pul 5111 1317 103 56 1261 1450Takhar 6063 2503 118 259 2243 1900Total 54128 24073 1098 5636 18437 18620

Less data, more info: This amount of data is sufficient for a statistically sound country X northern ag area estimate, with known error bars

In application, it produces this… compared to the CFSAM

Same amount of weather data for country Y….

… but with a better set of questions, better information about climate change in country Y…

…and countries Z and A…

Pattern of rainfall (to <500 mm isohyet) decline

Pattern of temperature increase (to >30c average daily temperature)

But, some fundamental issues remain…

Is this information good enough?

100120140160180200220240260280

Jan-07 Jan-08 Jan-09 Jan-10 Jan-11

Jan

2006

= 10

0Price Indices

Global Index East Africa West Africa

In light of this information, probably not…

Food and agriculture

organization B

50

100

150

200

250

300

Jan-07 Jan-08 Jan-09 Jan-10 Jan-11

Jan

2006

= 1

00Price Indices

W. Africa Coast W. Africa Sahel W. Africa Rice Importers

But where can/do we stop?

We will do what we can to share our strengths and our weaknesses, and you’ll get them all in our data

Perceptions/reality: at little cost and what benefit?

Intermediate conclusions:

• Less data, used wisely, may be good enough• Same data, better questions, may provide

better answers• A variety of new tools promise both• Some fundamental data questions remain to

be answered• My colleague’s data costs me nothing but a

trade; I am happy to trade• We all need household, national, regional and

global info, and should build/sustain capabilities at all these levels.