Successfully reported this slideshow.
We use your LinkedIn profile and activity data to personalize ads and to show you more relevant ads. You can change your ad preferences anytime.

Agriculture in Latin America and the Caribbean 1981-2012

551 views

Published on

Productivity and the Performance of Agriculture in Latin America and the Caribbean: From the Lost Decade to the Commodity Boom
By Nin Pratt, Alejandro; Falconi, César; Ludeña, Carlos E.; Martel, Pedro

-Between 2001 and 2012 we observed the best performance of LAC’s agriculture of the last 30 years
-Policy changes and high commodity prices seem to have played a major role in this improved performance.
-Most important, a better policy environment allowed countries to incorporate new technologies that resulted from regional R&D investment and a growing contribution of the private sector.
-Without fast growing prices and no positive shock from policy changes, future growth will depend on the development of efficient innovation systems in the region

Published in: Data & Analytics
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

Agriculture in Latin America and the Caribbean 1981-2012

  1. 1. Agriculture in Latin America and the Caribbean 1981-2012 IDB, Washington D.C., 27 April 2016 AgriculturalScienceandTechnologyIndicators Presented by Alejandro Nin-Pratt
  2. 2. THE PERFORMANCE OF AGRICULTURE
  3. 3.  Output and inputs for the period 1980-2011 (FAO)  Total output: constant dollars 2004-2006  Inputs: Fertilizer, feed, labor, land, capital (crop and livestock)  TFP index  Estimated coefficients from a C-D production function used to calculate an index of total input  TFP decomposed into efficiency and technical change using DEA. Data sources and methodology Productivity and the Performance of Agriculture in Latin America and the Caribbean: From the Lost Decade to the Commodity Boom Nin Pratt, Alejandro; Falconi, César; Ludeña, Carlos E.; Martel, Pedro https://publications.iadb.org/handle/11319/7306?locale-attribute=en
  4. 4. Levels and growth rates of output per worker, input per worker and TFP: 1980-2012
  5. 5. Performanceof the regionimprovedrelativeto that of OECD countries,but still high heterogeneityof results TFP levels relative to those in Niveles de PTF y la distancia entre ALC y OECD (OECD PFT=1)
  6. 6. Most countries performed well, increasing input per worker andTFP Output Input TFP Nicaragua Suriname Paraguay Brazil Dominican Republic Honduras Bahamas Peru Chile Mexico El Salvador Uruguay Argentina Costa Rica Bolivia Jamaica Barbados Guatemala Colombia Guyana Trinidad and Tobago Venezuela Ecuador Panama Belize Haiti 1.2 0.8 0.4 4.4 1.3 3.1 2.6 1.1 1.6 Countries grouped by levels of TFP growth rates (Growth rates of TFP, output and input per worker (%)
  7. 7. Factors behind the improved performance of agriculture  Changes in macroeconomic policies and in sectoral policies biased against agriculture  The boom in commodity prices was a significant stimulus for agricultural production and technology adoption  The adoption of new available technologies that resulted from: ▶ R&D investment in previous decades, particularly in Brazil, Argentina, Chile, Uruguay, Mexico and Costa Rica. ▶ The growing importance of the private sector and the new GMO technologies ▶ Spill-out of technologies to other countries in the region. ▶ Rapid expansion of commercial poultry production,
  8. 8. Knowledge stock available for LAC countries increased significantly Source: ISAAA (International Service for the Acquisition of Agri-biotech Applications)
  9. 9. The importance of GMO crops (Brazil, Argentina, Uruguay, Paraguay, Bolivia) Source: ISAAA (International Service for the Acquisition of Agri-biotech Applications)
  10. 10. Output growth in different regions
  11. 11. Page 11 Trends in the use of inputs
  12. 12. Analysis of R&D investment and the future of innovation in the region
  13. 13. Asystemofindicatorstolookatthe healthoftheresearchsystem Intensity Quality Impact FTEs Growth FTEs Expenditure Growth Investment allocation Efficiency Expenditure Structu re( PhDs, Age, Gende r) Structure (Gov., Donors) Growt h rate expen diture Financial constraint s, volatility Growt h compo nents Investment Index
  14. 14. Is the Intensity Ratio the right measure to determine who is underinvesting?
  15. 15. TheAII and the Intensity Ratio 0.02 0.03 0.06 0.13 0.25 0.50 1.00 0.03 0.06 0.13 0.25 0.50 1.00 ASTIIntensityIndexUSA=1 Intensity Ratio (R&D/AgGDP) USA=1 R&D InvestmentIntensity PAN CRI PER & NICCOL DOM PRY VEN HNDECU GTM BRA CHL URY ARG BOL MEX
  16. 16. The R&D investment gap in LAC Country Gap R&D 2008- 2011 R&D to close the gap Difference Brazil 0.0 2,390 2,390 0 Uruguay 0.3 67 85 18 Argentina 0.3 580 762 182 Bolivia 0.5 56 86 30 Chile 0.7 186 320 134 Costa Rica 1.2 38 82 45 Mexico 1.3 693 1,591 898 Sub-total 0.3 4,010 5,316 1306 Nicaragua 2.2 16 52 36 Panama 3.2 16 66 50 Peru 3.3 80 342 262 Colombia 3.7 122 572 449 Paraguay 4.7 18 101 83 Dominican Republic 5.8 20 134 114 Honduras 6.9 8 60 52 Ecuador 7.0 24 193 169 Venezuela 7.9 63 559 496 Guatemala 11.2 13 155 142 Sub-total 4.9 379 2,232 1,853 Total 0.53 8,399 12,864 4465
  17. 17. Conclusions  Between 2001 and 2012 we observed the best performance of LAC’s agriculture of the last 30 years  Policy changes and high commodity prices seem to have played a major role in this improved performance.  Most important, a better policy environment allowed countries to incorporate new technologies that resulted from regional R&D investment and a growing contribution of the private sector.  Without fast growing prices and no positive shock from policy changes, future growth will depend on the development of efficient innovation systems in the region
  18. 18. Agricultural S&TIndicators MUCHAS GRACIAS www.asti.cgiar.org

×