IFPRI Report
Volume 20, Number 2
July 1998
Commentary
Why Invest More in the Sustainable Development of Less-Favored Lands
Agricultural development strategies have traditionally emphasized irrigated agriculture and “high-potential” rainfed lands in an attempt to increase food production and stimulate economic growth. This strategy has been spectacularly successful in many countries and was responsible for the Green Revolution. At the same time, however, large areas of less-favored lands have been neglected. Agricultural potential is generally low on these lands, often because of poor soils and low and uncertain rainfall, but also because neglect has left them with limited infrastructure and poor access to markets.Despite some outmigration, population size continues to grow in many less-favored areas, but crop yields grow little or not at all. The result is worsening poverty, food insecurity, and widespread degradation of natural resources (including mining of soil fertility, soil erosion, deforestation, and loss of biodiversity). About 500 million people now live in less-favored lands, mostly in Asia and Sub-Saharan Africa; they comprise more than one-third of the rural poor. If current trends persist, by 2020 more than 800 million people are expected to live in less-favored lands.
It is becoming increasingly clear that, on poverty and environmental grounds alone, more attention will have to be given to less-favored lands in setting priorities for policy and public investments. Already, some governments and donors are spending more resources on crisis relief than on development of less-favored lands. This leads to two key policy questions. First, what level of investment can be justified in less-favored lands, including expenditure on agricultural research? Second, how should the resources be allocated to promote development that is beneficial to the poor and environmentally sustainable?
The amount of investment that can be justified in less-favored lands depends on the returns that are realized in productivity growth, poverty reduction, and the containment of environmental degradation. Conventional wisdom suggests that the productivity returns are highest from irrigated and high-potential rainfed lands; hence, the losses in efficiency associated with investing in less-favored lands must be offset by adequate poverty reduction and environmental benefits. But this view is being challenged by increasing evidence of stagnating levels of productivity growth in many Green Revolution areas, and by emerging evidence that the right kinds of investments can increase productivity to much higher levels than previously thought in some types of less-favored lands. For example, IFPRI’s research in India shows that additional investments in many low-potential rainfed lands could be a win-win strategy, leading to more agricultural growth and greater reduction of rural poverty. In fact, because of the high levels of investment already made in irrigated and high-potential rainfed areas in India, the marginal returns from some investments (particularly roads, irrigation, education, and agricultural research) are now more attractive in many less-favored lands. Similar quantitative research of this kind is needed in other countries in order to resolve the debate over investment priorities for less-favored lands.
Many past attempts to develop less-favored lands (for example, integrated rural development projects) were not very successful, including some of the research CGIAR centers have undertaken. To achieve success, higher levels of investment in less-favored lands have to be based on new or improved paradigms for sustainable development. In some areas, agricultural development may not be an economically viable alternative, and solutions will need to be sought through development of the nonfarm economy and through accelerated migration. In other areas, agricultural intensification will be a key component of the development strategy, but because of poor infrastructure, low-to-moderate yield potential, and high climate risk, the strategy will typically be different from the Green Revolution approach. Agricultural researchers and farmers must take a holistic approach to improving farming systems and land management practices: soil and water management, plant nutrient generation and recycling, and exploitation of favorable niches in a landscape for production of high-value crops and trees will be especially important. Improved research will also have to be matched by increased investments in rural infrastructure, health, and education, and by appropriate institutional strengthening (such as secure property rights to natural resources for the people who use them and effective local institutions for organizing and managing common properties and collective action). A conducive policy environment that includes effective risk management options for offsetting severe climate risks (such as droughts) and policies to help people on less-favored lands access and compete in liberalized markets are also essential.
The successful development of less-favored lands will require strong partnerships between agricultural researchers and other agents of change, including local organizations, national policymakers, and donors. It will require innovation and also time—time for assessing and evaluating new approaches as they are developed.
Peter Hazell
Peter Hazell is director of the Environment and Production Technology Division at IFPRI.
