This report assesses the impact of the International Food Policy Research Institute’s (IFPRI) Global Research Program on Priorities for Public Investment in Agriculture and Rural Areas (“GRP-3”). Initiated in 1998, the stated objectives of the research program were (1) to increase public investment for rural areas and the agricultural sector given that there is an underspending in the sector and (2) to better target and improve efficiency of public resources to achieve these growth and poverty reduction goals, as well as other development goals. GRP-3 evolved out of research on the impacts of alternative types of public spending on income and poverty outcomes in India and China that was conducted by staff of IFPRI’s Environment and Production Technology Division (later the Development Strategy and Governance Division). Those studies indicated that public investments in infrastructure—in particular, investments in roads, agricultural research and development (R&D), and education—yielded sizeable marginal benefits in terms of poverty alleviation and income generation in rural areas. This line of research was later expanded to encompass a number of countries in Africa and, to a lesser extent, Southeast Asia and the Middle East. A second major (and ongoing) thrust of the program is to support African governments in establishing public investment priorities and strategies for promoting rural economic growth and poverty alleviation. Major activities undertaken include providing analytical and institutional support to the Comprehensive Africa Agriculture Development Programme (CAADP) and evaluations of individual publicly-funded programs in several African countries. GRP-3 has generated an impressive array of published outputs. The great bulk of these emerged from the research conducted in India and China. A much smaller number of published outputs have been generated by the (more recently conducted) research in Africa; however, a substantial number of papers, book manuscripts, and monographs are in various stages of the publication process. Other important program outputs include a variety of public expenditure databases suitable for assessing the nature and effects of individual countries’ spending priorities. GRP-3 research has had substantial influence on public expenditure priorities in India and China. Most notably, published research in India played a key role in the institution of the Rural Roads Program that directed huge sums toward construction of roads connecting large numbers of previously unserved villages. Quantitative assessment of the positive impacts from these road investments indicates that IFPRI research can reasonably take substantial credit for lifting tens of thousands of individuals out of poverty and increasing agricultural GDP by billions of rupees. Additionally, in both China and India, GRP-3 research has influenced recent policy conversations that have led to increased spending on agricultural R&D and education. Overall, the program has substantially met its stated objectives in Asia. GRP-3 research in Africa has yet to fully meet the program’s objectives, in large part because the policymaking process in the countries where IFPRI has been active are still not far enough advanced for the research outputs to have translated into actual policies. Still, some important outcomes have emerged: The work IFPRI has conducted in support of CAADP has successfully shepherded 19 countries through the Compact process. However, the Compacts are intermediate products; it remains to be seen the extent to which governments follow through on the plans contained within them. IFPRI’s compilations of disparate public expenditure data in a large number of countries represent a useful local public good for use by research and practitioner communities outside of IFPRI. In addition, IFPRI’s role in guiding the formation and operation of a regional strategic assessment and knowledge support system (ReSAKSS) has boosted, if not created, institutional capacity for future monitoring and evaluation activities. Research on the impact of public investments in the agricultural sector has been useful to the donor community by providing empirical backstopping for ongoing policy dialogues with governments. However, the difficult—and often contentious—political environment in which those dialogues occur has meant that policy outcomes are still materializing (and far from certain).

This report assesses the impact of IFPRI’s social-protection research program (GRP28) from 2000 to 2012 (including its predecessor, MP18). The assessment includes an extensive review of public goods produced by the program, stakeholder perceptions of the program’s public goods and research activities, case studies (Bangladesh, London, Mexico, Rome, and Washington, DC), and policy or programming changes that resulted from IFPRI-sponsored research, capacity strengthening, and research-policy linkages between 2000 and 2012. Over 40 interviews were conducted with national stakeholders, donors, IFPRI staff, government officials, and individuals who participated in or had knowledge of IFPRI’s activities regarding social protection during this timeframe. IFPRI’s social-protection research activities conducted under the GRP28 are ongoing and extend beyond the 2012 endline of this assessment. GRP28 research activities initiated during the latter part of the 12-year timeframe (that is, in 2010, 2011, or 2012) are limited or absent from this assessment if results had not been published at the time the study was initiated early in the summer of 2014.

IFPRI’s Poverty, Health, and Nutrition Division (PHND) and the CGIAR Research Program on Agriculture for Nutrition and Health (A4NH) have conducted research since 2003 on the critical links between nutrition, health, and agriculture. This evaluation considers the impact of the work carried out through 2016, looking at the research strategy, engagement, capacity building, and impact on programs and policies and global dialogue. Findings suggest that the Diet Quality and Health of the Poor program has been successful in developing and sharing valuable research, knowledge, and data, and has brought new issues and approaches to partners and stakeholders. Through a range of projects, the program has effectively engaged with stakeholders, partners, and governments to support capacity enhancement and to help shape national interventions to improve nutrition.

Well-funded and well-staffed agricultural research systems with efficient allocation of research resources are important for improving agricultural productivity and for meeting other agricultural development goals. Assessing research system funding adequacy and staffing, as compared to alternative investments, and allocating research resources within systems require data on agricultural research investments. The Agricultural Science and Technology Indicators (ASTI) initiative at IFPRI is the most comprehensive source of agricultural research statistics for low- and middle-income countries. Since 2001, building on an earlier International Service for National Agricultural Research (ISNAR) effort, ASTI has developed a network of institutional collaborators at national and regional levels who assist in implementing surveys to collect agricultural research investment data in Africa, Asia, the Middle East, and Latin America. ASTI compiles, processes, and publicizes the data at national, regional, and global levels. It has published a broad set of country briefs, notes, and regional synthesis reports that have been cited in national and international policy documents. The primary outputs from ASTI are the country data sets, which are now published on the website, http://www.asti.cgiar.org/. Data are published for 32 countries in Sub-Saharan Africa, 15 countries in Latin America and the Caribbean, 5 countries in South Asia, 7 countries in East and Southeast Asia, 5 countries in the Middle East and North Africa, and 1 country in the Pacific. The ASTI website’s Data Tool aids in accessing the data. The website’s readers can click on a world map to find for individual countries’ data on five types of research expenditure variables (in US$ and PPPs), five types of research staff variables, and five research share variables. Readers can then plot variables against each other in a graph or export and download data in Excel files. Data can also be uploaded using a survey form available in three languages. Since 2004, ASTI has produced 91 country-level publications: 50 country briefs, notes, and reports and 16 fact sheets on gender-disaggregated capacity indicators for Sub-Saharan Africa; 13 briefs and reports for the Asia-Pacific region, 5 for the Middle East and North Africa, and 7 for Latin America and the Caribbean. ASTI researchers themselves have conducted relatively few in-depth analyses using the data, but they have teamed with other researchers on papers and presentations and other researchers have made significant use of ASTI data.

The International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI) has undertaken research programs on agricultural STI policy since 1995. This study assesses the impact of this body of research outputs and support services in terms of three complementary analyses: (1) an evaluation of the potential impact of the complete body of research using implicit or explicit impact pathways, (2) two case studies that assess the actual impact of particular research outputs, and (3) a more traditional bibliometric analysis. Movement along the impact pathway, in turn, requires different types of research products—evolving from problem framing to methodology development, then to case studies, and finally to context-specific policy recommendations—all within the logical stages of the impact pathway. How far IFPRI operates along this impact pathway produces a basic tension between the CGIAR’s mandate to produce international public goods (IPGs) and the increasing focus on accountability through impact in the use of international public funds.