Presentation to ICAR management teamNew Delhi | 2 July 2012

TRACKING AGRICULTURAL R&D DEVELOPMENTS ASTI’s experiences in India

Nienke BeintemaASTI program head | International Food Policy Research Institute

Outline presentation

• A short overview of the ASTI program

• Results and experiences in India

• ASTI’s new directions and opportunities for long term collaboration with ICAR

Importance of agricultural R&D indicators

• Key for understanding the contribution of agricultural R&D to economic growth

• Assist R&D stakeholders in formulating policy, setting priorities, undertaking strategic planning, monitoring, and evaluation

• Provide information to R&D stakeholders involved in the public debate on the state of agricultural R&D at national, regional, and international levels

• Importance of S&T indicators has increasingly been recognized by policymakers (e.g., Accountability Report for G8 meeting 2012; International Agencies Report for G20 meeting 2012; GCARD roadmap 2010)

Agricultural Science and Technology Indicators (ASTI)

• Collection of national-level investment and human resource capacity data on agricultural R&D:– Focus on low– and middle–income

countries (coverage ± 60)– Through institutional survey rounds

(primary data)

• Through a large collaborative network of national, regional and international partners; facilitated by IFPRI

• Aim is to provide:– Trends over time at country / regional

levels; within countries– Comparisons across countries / regions;

within countries

Objectives of ASTI

• Provide up-to-date and high quality data on agricultural R&D investment, capacity, and institutional trends

• Conduct further analysis based on ASTI data to improve their relevance to a variety of stakeholders

• Enhance dissemination and use of ASTI outputs for policy formulation and advocacy

• Strengthen data collection capacity and analysis and stimulate use of ASTI outputs as information and analytical tools

Current ASTI outputs

• Country notes• Regional and subregional reports• Data in-focus sheets• Datasets and country profiles• Country/regional/other seminars

and presentations• Analytical assessments• Blog• Workshops / Accra conference• Press releases / media outreach• ASTI website

ASTI’s wide range of stakeholders

ASTI

National agricultural

R&D agencies and

policymakers

Multilateral Organizations

International policymakers, advisors, and

donors

Regional/sub-regional

organizations

CGIARGFAR

Academic Community Communicate

WHAT to WHO and HOW?

Outline presentation

• Short overview of the ASTI program

• Results and experiences in India

• ASTI’s new directions and opportunities for long term collaboration with ICAR

ASTI-ICAR study on recent trends in India

• Coverage: public (= government, higher education, nonprofit)

• Identified 167 agencies involved in agricultural R&D:– 94 ICAR institutes– 12 other government agencies: (8 ICFRE institutes and

commodity boards for coffee, rubber, silk, tea)– 45 SAUs– 16 other higher education agencies

• Surveys were received from 82 ICAR institutes, 28 SAUs, and 5 other government and higher education agencies

• Annual reports and aggregated data from ICAR have been used to estimate missing agencies

Overview of public agricultural R&D spending and staffing (2009)

Total spendingPPP

Type of agency Rupees dollars Shares Number Shares(%) (FTEs) (%)

ICAR (94) 17.9 1.2 54 3,817 34Other government (12) 3.6 0.2 11 1,015 9SAU (45) 11.4 0.8 34 6,158 55Other higher education (16) 0.4 0.03 1 227 2Subtotal public (167) 33.4 2.3 100 11,217 100Private 7.8 0.5 — na —Total 41.2 2.8

Total researchers

(billion 2005 prices)

public (81%)

private (19%)

Private sector data from Pray and Nagarajan (2012)

Public agricultural R&D spending

2009: ICAR 18 b. rupees SAUs 11 b. rupees

1996: ICAR 6 b. rupees SAUs 5 b. rupees

0.0

0.7

1.4

2.0

2.7

0.0

10.0

20.0

30.0

40.0

1996 1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 2008

ICAR (94) Other government (12)

SAU (45) Other higher education (16)

Billion 2005 PPP dollarsBilli

on 2

005

rupe

es

Public agricultural researchers

2009: ICAR 3,817 FTEs SAUs 6,158 FTEs

1996: ICAR 4,201 FTEs SAUs 7,405 FTEs

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

1996 1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 2008

ICAR (94) Other government (12)

SAU (45) Other higher education (16)

Num

ber o

f FTE

re

sear

cher

s (1

000s

)

33%20% 14%

67%80% 86%

0

20

40

60

80

100

1996 2003 2009

MSc PhD

Shar

e of

FTE

rese

arch

ers

(%)

Degree qualifications of ICAR researchers

*BSc-degree holders are not qualified as researchers.

Age structure of ICAR researchers (2009)

*Coverage: 69% of ICAR researchers.

12%20%

41%

23%

40%

17%

37%

30% 22% 29%

7% 7% 7%

0

20

40

60

80

100

PhD MSc Total

< 31 years 31-40 years 41-50 years 51-60 years > 60 years

Shar

e of

FTE

rese

arch

ers

(%)

Research focus (2009)

*Coverage: 70% of ICAR and SAU researchers.

43%

71%60%

16%

6%10%9%

5%7%7%

25%16% 20%

0

20

40

60

80

100

ICAR SAUs Total

Crops Livestock Natural resources Fisheries Other

Shar

e of

FTE

rese

arch

ers

(%)

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009

Tota

l pub

lic a

gric

ultu

ral R

&D

sp

endi

ng (i

n bi

llion

200

5 PP

P$)

Spending trends for key countries

India

Unites States

Brazil

China

Australia

Sub-Saharan Africa

Intensity ratios for key countries (2007-09)

0.0

0.5

1.0

1.5

2.0

2.5

3.0

3.5

India China SSA Brazil USA Australia

Agric

ultu

ral R

&D

spen

ding

as

a sh

are

of A

gGD

P

• High commitment from ICAR, IARI, NCAP to work with ASTI in two separate survey rounds

• Lack of responses to survey from all type of agencies, particularly SAUs, other higher education, and other government

• Private sector has not been included because difficulties in capturing data

• Availability of total ICAR spending, but not by agency• Data from annual reports (ICAR institutes and SAUs) are often

not complete and differ from one year to the next• Response rate in 2002-04 was much higher due to provision of

an incentive

ASTI’s experiences in India

Outline presentation

• Short overview of the ASTI program

• Results and experiences in India

• ASTI’s new directions and opportunities for long term collaboration with ICAR

• Need to establish an institutionalized data collection system at regular intervals

• Need to expand geographical coverage

• Need to expand analysis beyond the descriptive examination of national and regional trends

• Focused on input indicators, not output, performance, and outcome indicators

• Building capacity to improve long-term sustainability of ASTI, and increase the reach, advocacy, and policy relevance of the data

ASTI’s longtime challenges

The new ASTI model for Africa and South Asia

• Move from ad-hoc data collection to a sustainable and institutionalized monitoring system with frequent updates

• Enhance ownership of the data and stimulate further advocacy and analysis at the national level

• Intensify further analysis of trends to make information more relevant for policymakers and other stakeholders

• Address the demand to measure the effectiveness of agricultural R&D institutions as well

• Achieving impact

Proposal to institutionalize ASTI in India

• Linking ASTI’s activities with ICAR’s PME cells at institute level and SAUs; latter could be mandated to collect ASTI data

• ASTI’s new online data management system could be used as it allows for including complementary indicators that are not part of ASTI’s set of key indicators, but which are relevant for ICAR and the SAUs

• Coordination of data collection (to ensure comparability and quality) to be mandated to 1-2 ICAR institutes (NCAP?)

• Coordinating institute will also be mandated to report on trends and conduct further analyses

• ASTI/IFPRI will provide technical assistance and collaborate on analyses, focusing also on cross-country comparisons with other emerging countries

THANK YOU