In the opening lines of his 2012 annual letter, Bill Gates stresses the need for innovation, as key to improving the world. “When innovators work on urgent problems and deliver solutions to people in need, the results can be magical”, he says.
Bill Gates gives an overview of his ideas for innovation in global health and U.S. education, but first on his list is a call for “innovation in agriculture”.
“Given the central role that food plays in human welfare and national stability, it is shocking—not to mention short-sighted and potentially dangerous—how little money is spent on agricultural research“, according to Gates.
“In total, only $3 billion per year is spent on researching the seven most important crops. This includes $1.5 billion spent by countries, $1.2 billion by private companies, and $300 million by an agency called the Consultative Group on International Agricultural Research (CGIAR).”
“Even though the CGIAR money is only 10 percent of the spending, it is critical because it focuses on the needs of poor countries“, says Gates.
In his letter, Gates mentions the threat of Ug99, a wheat stem rust, an area where CIMMYT, one of the CGIAR Consortium research centers has achieved considerable success.
Gates also give an example how cassava diseases threaten to cripple crops in Tanzania, a major area of concern for the CGIAR. After a decade of research, CGIAR Consortium research centers and partners just released a disease-tolerant cassava variety in Africa.
CGIAR’s IRRI, the International Rice Research Institute, also worked on the forefront of the research on Swarna-Sub1, a submergence-tolerant rice variety, which Gates witnessed to survive in Asia’s flooded fields.
Read the Bill Gates 2012 annual letter.
Read more examples how CGIAR’s research impacts farmers.
Picture courtesy The Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation
I agree with Bill Gate. Today’s development has overlooked small scale agricultural farms which are feeding millions and millions of people in developing countries. There is a little attention to non-commercial subsistence which many people have survived on for many years. If we don’t promote small scale food producers, those well off would not escape from food insecurity. For example, if we check our supermarkets in developed countries, many fresh vegetables and other pre-processed foods are from developing countries. Without small scale agriculture which the majority of poor people are depending on in order to survive, to educate their children, to pay their health care, there is not need for million of international organizations to waste money for projects which are not benefiting everyone. I think someone among policy makers for sustainable development has to admit that their policies without full participation of those in needs, whose majority cannot survive without small scale agriculture have failed to alleviate poverty. These policies are doing more harm than good.
I am aware of this because for the last 16 years I am working with grass-root beneficiaries especially women, young people and children. By listening to them I managed to provide efficient services within limited financial means. What facilitated my work in development, capacity building and empowerment was good working relationship with people I am working with and for, other national and international partners.
If we have to promote agriculture, we have to step back from our expertise by profession and learn from experts by experience (small scale farmers) and figure out together what help they are looking for and what improvements they wish in their current practices. This way, when we leave them, they would be able to sustain their agricultural activities and take control over their own social change.
Hi Odette,
I agree with you. I can also see that many projects within the CGIAR not only take the needs of small scale farmers into account, but also test and “roll-out” the agricultural solutions provided.
More and more, the farmers are integrated into the research cycle, not only as of the “needs assessment”, but throughout the process, all the way up to implementation and impact assessment.
This way, their experience can be combined with the researchers’ input, e.g. their knowledge of their land and traditional methods/seeds can be combined with the climate change forecasts from the researchers. Their skills can be combined with innovative irrigation systems found to be working in other areas of the world…