GCARD2: Foresight, projections and issues of Agricultural Research Coordination for future smallholder impact http://www.egfar.org/gcard-2012 GCARD2: Perspectives, projections et enjeu de la coordination d'une recherche agricole orientée dans le future vers des petits paysans http://www.egfar.org/gcard-2012 GCARD2 Prospectiva, proyecciones y problemas de coordinación de la investigación agrícola para el impacto futuro de agricultores pequeños. http://www.egfar.org/gcard-2012

1. Foresight in the
GCARD 2012 process
Mark Holderness
GFAR Secretariat

2. Challenges in planning & investing in
AR4D for future smallholder impacts
• Agriculture is highly context-specific, yet there are also common
global challenges, so we must think at multiple levels
• Outcome-based planning requires that all enabling factors are taken
care of and failure-causes anticipated and addressed along pathways
to impact.
• Desired outcomes (impact) should shape required current research
and investment and have to be balanced by policy makers weighting
positive and negative impacts on different sectors
• Uncertainty about decision and impact can be reduced through
future studies, such as foresight and projections, whose role is to
inform, not prescribe policies and practices
• Projections are based on certain assumptions and
perspectives, which may not be shared by others, in particular by the
communities concerned

3. Some key features of foresight and projections
Foresight Projection
Mostly qualitative Quantitative
Scenario-based Simulation-based
hypothetical sequences of events constructed to “what if?” simulation uses selected variables
focus attention on possible contrasting (e.g. IFPRI 3 population/income scenarios x 4
evolutions and decision–points that can shape climate change scenarios) to help draw
trends towards one or another. They help attention to critical situations and inform
manage uncertainties in strategic decisions based on assessment of
social, political, institutional dimensions and risks and returns, within the parameters used
challenge the presumptions held by different
actors
Anticipate and explore Calculate and predict
Deals with trends and ruptures Deals with trends and alternatives
Multi-dimensional variables Economic, technical and bio-physical

4. Limitations of Future Studies
Projections
 Use reduced set of variables and loose proxies for real facts
 Only as good as available quantitative data and its quality and coverage
 linear/deterministic approach (what-if)
 contradictory/different findings/divergences
 Influenced by external events
Foresight scenarios
 Still a limited set of variables
 Contains inherent subjectivity that requires balancing
 influenced by external events
 usually lack quantitative development to predict returns

5. Reconciling two families of “future studies”
1. assessments and projections
a. Assessments b. Projections/forecasts
World Development Reports, WB Outlook to 2030/2050, FAO
IAASTD, WB/UN Food Security , Farming and CC, IFPRI
SCAR 2nd Foresight Exercise, EU Threshold 21 , Millennium Institute.
Ruralstruc WB/CIRAD Global Future of Food and Farming, UK
GCARD 2010 Regional priorities
Choosing the
Highlighting the
preferred
likely scenario
2. foresight scenario
a. Anticipatory scenario building: b. A vision of the future
Socioeconomic scenarios, IPCC Green Growth Strategy, OECD
SCAR 1 2007,EU Greening Economy with Agriculture, FAO
Mediterra 2008, CIHEAM Agrimonde 1
Agrimonde, INRA, CIRAD CAWMA, IWMI
Millenium Ecosystem Assesment APEC 2050 Low-carbon Society
Southern Africa Agriculture, IISD Rural Ireland 2025
Energy scenarios 2050, Shell
The Future of the Global Financial System, WEF

6. Why more coordinated forward thinking?
Not for predicting what the world will be in 2030 or 2050 or 2080...
For deciding in what kind of world we would like to see in 2030 or 2050 or 2080...
The research we choose to begin now must address tomorrow’s needs and impact is
not instant
Two underlying postulates
•The nature of the process in co-producing knowledge among stakeholders is a
stronger determinant of influence than the final outputs
•Impact here is the ability to change mindsets, it is a long process
A concept of coordination
An open and inclusive mechanism seeking complementarities so that all stakeholders
involved in the future of the rural world can have their say in shaping preferred
futures
Application
Forward thinking for agricultural research to meet the future needs of the rural world:
The Global Foresight Hub

7. The Global Foresight Hub

8. Forward Thinking Platform
A permanent opportunity to develop collective thinking supported by commitment of
its members
An annual inclusive venue (Foresight Exchange Workshop) for sharing
results, comparing methods, and discussing controversies arising from field experiences
Policy Dialogue Platforms
Facilitate dialogue between scientists, policy makers and civil society
Give room to the voices of society, especially small farmers, to be incorporated in
shaping research orientations
Foresight Academy
Region by region, starting with Sub-Saharan Africa,
Develop the skills and capabilities of young professionals to shape their own futures

9. Key issues calling for coordination
We are faced with: different questions in a complex agriculture; different
stakeholders and different regions; different institutional perspectives
and different tools & methods
3 key themes were thus prioritized in the Beijing meeting of the Forward-
Thinking Platform of the Global Foresight Hub:
• What is the future for smallholder farming? (e.g. What are the
farming patterns of the future? Who will be making a living from
agriculture? Who will be living in rural areas?)
• How will we use our land in the future? (e.g. Who owns the land?
Who decides on how the land is used? How to value food vs fuel, or
staples vs commodities? Impacts of urbanization?)
• How will consumption shape future production? (e.g. implications
of protein demands, wastage, food safety. How can we achieve both
national food security and household nutrition?)
The outcome is always the result of the process; it depends on who decides on the
question, on the relevant variables, on the methodology, on the desired futures...

10. Aims of Forward-thinking sessions at
GCARD2
• The aim is not to produce one universally applicable answer, but to build better understanding of
the implications of different agricultural choices
The session should:
• Define clear actions to improve our forward-thinking and its impact in research/ implementation
prioritization and informing policies
• Run over three half-days, with specific sub-themes intended to trigger more collective and
coherent actions in a step-wise process.
• Focus on impact through both content (what can forward-thinking studies tell us about agriculture
in the future?) and process (how can we achieve more effective analyses of our future needs and
trigger required research now?).
• Bringing together and finding common ground among diverse analyses and perspectives on future
needs, recognizing the assumptions being made in each and how these influence research
prioritization.
• Set out what is required to develop a more coherent and integrated use of diverse forward
looking, anticipatory approaches, so that investments made now are based on more robust
viewpoints and better targeted to the particular needs of resource-poor smallholders.

11. The writeshops
• A worldwide inventory has been conducted of forward-looking, anticipatory work
over recent years, in national regional and global studies, including the work of the
CGIAR
• This yielded more than 50 relevant and documented “cases” directly related to
agriculture and rural development.
• Case-based evidence will be brought together by the authors concerned, into a
common format and coverage.
• The writing workshops are designed to provide the appropriate environment for this
purpose and considering issues specific to each region.
• Cases will combine the content and the process and assumptions used for these
studies, so that lessons can be learned from each case and from cross-analyses.
• These cases will provide the substance and information required to inform the
GCARD2 foresight session on the current state of foresight, its content and process.
• They should help enable learning on how foresighting can be made more effective
and how resultant research take best account of future societal needs.

12. Each case study will explore:
• Content: gathering and analyzing information on topics, visions, emerging challenges and
methods, focusing on the following question:
What role could smallholder farmers play in meeting the future needs in food and nutrition
security, poverty alleviation and sustainable management of natural resources? This
question calls for particular attention to three key thematic issues identified by foresight
practitioners in the Beijing workshop:
• What is the future for smallholder farming?
• How will we use our land in the future?
• How will consumption shape production?
This will feed sessions 1 and 2a and b.
• Process: why and how have these studies developed and what assumptions have been made
in these processes in coming to their views? What can be inferred from this in terms of the
partnerships and capacities required for their impact? This will feed sessions 3a and b.
• Impact: the outline will seek to provide information and an analytical background on how
these studies have affected prioritization of research, policy decisions and ultimately, farmers
livelihoods. This will feed session 1.

13. Regional considerations
• Sessions provide opportunity for regional needs identified
through GCARD 2010 consultations and now in some cases
being updated (e.g. S. Asia, Latin America), to be brought
together with the perspectives of the identified case studies.
• Engagement of the Regional Fora in the write workshops, will
enable existing regional reports produced for GCARD 1 to be
re-visited and synthesized into “benchmark” cases stimulating
collective reflections on future needs.
• This will aid identification of new challenges, revisiting of
priorities and needs, adjusting actions and show where
further anticipatory studies may be required

14. Wider stakeholder e-consultations
Regional e-consultations should follow on the write-
shop products, prior to the GCARD 2 :
• Constituency perspectives on the conclusions being
drawn from the diverse analyses,
• Implications of the state of foresight for their own
actions and
• What they are themselves prepared to do to improve
foresighting processes to better meet their needs.

15. The CGIAR SRF
• More effective foresighting is seen as the key need
for improving the Strategy & Results Framework for
investments being made in the CGIAR Consortium.
• The assumptions in the CRPs and the SRF will be
articulated into the GCARD 2012 foresight
process, enabling public debate and bringing in the
perspectives of their intended beneficiaires and end-
users to directly shape and strengthen the action
plan for implementing the SRF .

16. When? What and how? Who?
Action 1. Stock-taking about who
Consortium and CRP partners to
has engaged in thinking forward
review and document their own
Nov 2011- Mapping (next 10 to 20 years) using the
forward-thinking analyses and
Feb 2012 diversity question of the future of farming
the perspectives, projections and All stakeholders though
systems as a case and 2) identify
scenarios established with regard Internet with support of
what Fora, CGIAR
to future farming patterns as a
ideas, scenarios, challenges, long
case in the CRP context and
term visions have resulted of their
identify ideas, visions and key
work
challenges and how programmes
April 2012 Exploring Action 2. identify visions and key and partners have responded to Throuh Fora, Farmer
diversity challenges and how organizations those priorities Org, NGO and CSO, CGIAR
have responded to those priorities
Highlighting Action 3. Preparation of background documents Through Fora, Farmer
May 2012
diversity on progresses and results on 1) and 2) Org, NGO and CSO, CGIAR
This is were we are and what
the writeshops will do
Through Fora, Farmer
June-Aug. Reporting Action 4. Joint preparation of a progress
Org, NGO and CSO, CGIAR
2012 diversity report and results on 1) and 2)
Action 5. GCARD consultation progress Key participants from
27-28 oct report and implications: actions on Fora, Farmer Org, NGO and
2012 priorities, partnership and capacity building CSO, ARIs and IOs, CGIAR
GCARD 2:
Turning
29 oct Action 6. GCARD 2 Foresight Session
diversity All GCARD participants +
2012 Plenary progress report by contributors Special Foresight Invitees
into Working group on priorities, partnership and capacity building
actions
1 Nov Action 7. GCARD agenda of action for ‘improved’ foresight
2012 GCARD participants
Research priorities Partnership Capacity building

17. Thank You