Efforts to promote the development and agricultural value chains area common element of strategies to stimulate economic growth in low-income countries. Since the world food price crisis in 2007-2008, developing country governments, international donor agencies, and development practitioners have placed additional focus on trying to make agricultural value chains work better for the poor. As value chains evolve to serve new markets, they tend to become less inclusive. For example, if a value chain for high quality rice arises within an economy, it is inherently easier for those who sell rice to retailers to source that high quality rice from larger farms with the ability to control quality than from dozens of smallholder farms. As a result, the normal path of value chain evolution can be biased against smallholders; hence it is important to understand what types of interventions can make value chains more inclusive while also making them more efficient.

Efforts to promote the development of agricultural value chains are a common element of strategies to stimulate economic growth in low-income countries. Since the world food price crisis in 2007-2008, developing country governments, international donor agencies, and development practitioners have placed additional emphasis on making agricultural value chains work better for the poor. As value chains evolve to serve new markets, they tend to become less inclusive. For example, if a market for high quality rice arises within an economy, it is inherently easier for traders who sell rice to retailers to source that high quality rice from larger farms that are better able to control its quality than from dozens of smallholder farms. As a result, the normal path of value chain evolution can be biased against smallholders; hence, it is important to understand what types of interventions can make value chains more inclusive while also making them more efficient. In this brief, we summarize studies on five types of value chain interventions that were supported by the CGIAR’s Research Program on Policies, Institutions, and Markets (PIM) through its Flagship 3 on Inclusive and Effective Value Chains. Figure 1 illustrates a “typical” agricultural value chain, including the five intervention types (in orange). These include interventions that attempt to deal with multiple production constraints; certification; contract farming; public-private partnerships; and “other” services related to trading and marketing agricultural products. Apart from the last category, these interventions all involve production. This reflects the fact that smallholder producers can be considered, in some ways, the weakest link in evolving agricultural value chains (de Brauw and Bulte 2021). Hence, it is sensible to target interventions either at or close to smallholders. However, in some cases, the best way to overcome smallholder constraints may be to help actors at other points in the value chain overcome constraints. Many interventions share a focus on reducing transaction costs to promote smallholder market integration. Ideally, interventions increase both efficiency and inclusion, but we observe that such win-win outcomes are rare. Trade-offs appear to be more common than synergies, and some value chain interventions involve clear winners and losers.

At the start of CGIAR Research Program on Policies, Institutions, and Markets (PIM) Phase 2 in 2017, and later during the priority-setting round in 2019, each of the PIM research areas (‘flagships’) formulated key research questions they aimed to answer and identified theories of change and pathways to achieve impact. In this series, we share highlights of what we have learned and achieved and suggest areas to be explored in the future.

Policies, Institutions, and Markets (PIM) is one of CGIAR’s Global Integrating Programs, focused on addressing the policy, institutional, and market constraints to sustainable and equitable economic development and rural transformation. Such roadblocks include regulations restricting adoption of technologies by smallholder farmers, inefficient allocation of public resources, market failures or missing markets, weak property rights, restrictive gender norms and practices, and exposure of smallholders to shocks and risks. PIM aims to address these constraints through four main channels: global agenda setting, national policy support, program and market innovations, and capacity development.

In 2020, PIM findings contributed to seed policies in Nepal and Uganda, Malawi’s extension strategy and approval of insect-resistant cotton, a nationwide program aimed at improving the effectiveness of public service delivery in Uganda, social protection programs in Egypt, and school gardens for better nutrition in Papua New Guinea. At the global level, PIM research was used to shape strategic decisions of organizations such as the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, GIZ, the Inter-American Development Bank, the UK Government's Foreign, Commonwealth & Development Office, the World Bank and the World Health Organization. PIM tools were incorporated in universities’ curricula in India and South Africa. Examples of PIM innovations scaled up by partners in 2020 are private sector seed marketing in Ethiopia, picture-based insurance in Ethiopia, India and Kenya, and tools for inclusive governance of natural resources in India and Peru.

Governments, nongovernmental organizations, donors, and the private sector have increasingly embraced value-chain development (VCD) for stimulating economic growth and combating rural poverty. Innovation for Inclusive Value-Chain Development: Successes and Challenges helps to fill the current gap in systematic knowledge about how well VCD has performed, related trade-offs or undesired effects, and which combinations of VCD elements are most likely to reduce poverty and deliver on overall development goals. This book uses case studies to examine a range of VCD experiences. Approaching the subject from various angles, it looks at new linkages to markets and the role of farmer organizations and contract farming in raising productivity and access to markets, the minimum assets requirement to participate in VCD, the role of multi-stakeholder platforms in VCD, and how to measure and identify successful VCD interventions. The book also explores the challenges livestock-dependent people face; how urbanization and advancing technologies affect linkages; ways to increase gender inclusion and economic growth; and the different roles various types of platforms play in VCD.

PIM had a productive final year centered on synthesizing findings while continuing to respond to demand on the impacts of COVID-19 and preparing the transition to the new CGIAR portfolio. PIM findings and engagement contributed to Myanmar’s response to COVID-19, South Africa’s policies on resilience to climate change, Tunisia's policies for pastoral development, a reform of Nigeria’s national agricultural research system, Ghana’s fish seed and farm certification system, gender strategies for three agricultural value chains in Honduras, and genome editing guidelines for the agricultural sector in four African countries. PIM research informed policy documents of FAO, IFAD, One CGIAR, the UK Government, the World Bank and the World Food Programme. PIM tools enabled more equitable co-management of 76 protected areas in Peru and informed World Bank social protection projects. Books on food security in Bangladesh and Malawi, trade in Latin America, African agricultural value chains and gender were published. 42 PIM synthesis briefs and notes were issued, summarizing research results in key thematic areas. PIM contributed 181 journal articles, 8 journal issues (on demand driven seed systems, China’s response to COVID-19, agriculture and food security in China under COVID-19, food loss and waste, landscape restoration, multistakeholder fora in forestry and two issues on gender), 15 book chapters and about 500 non-peer-reviewed outputs. 16 PIM webinars were organized. PIM’s contributions to the United Nations Food Systems Summit covered agricultural extension, food system innovations and digital technologies, the future of small farms, the science-policy interface, the cost of ending hunger by 2030, food waste and loss, management of the commons and gender. Building on past PIM investments in economywide modeling tools and social accounting matrices, PIM teams continued to assess the impacts of COVID-19 and policy responses at country level. Lessons learned from PIM country-level analyses on COVID-19’s impacts on food systems, poverty and diets are summarized in a chapter of the IFPRI 2022 book “COVID19 and global food security: Two years later”. A paper in partnership with the CGIAR COVID19 Hub reviewed the literature on agri-food value chains for evidence of fractures and resilience in response to the pandemic. The results of coordinated studies on the impacts of COVID-19 on value chains in different countries were published. Several cross-CGIAR outputs initiated by PIM speak to the fulfillment of PIM’s convening role as an integrating program: the CGIAR Foresight Report and CGIAR foresight website; several outputs produced through the CGIAR Community of Excellence on Seed Systems Development, and the CGIAR book “Advancing gender equality through agricultural and environmental research: Past, present, and future” are examples. Other examples of PIM global public goods produced in 2021 are 27 innovations at various stages of uptake, a cross-cutting effort to distill PIM lessons on migration; new or updated social accounting matrices for 25 countries; and lessons and tools on stakeholder platforms for natural resource governance. Independent reviews assessed the effectiveness of PIM’s partnerships and the use by partners of PIM’s work on economywide modelling, agricultural insurance, tenure and governance, and the Ag-Incentives database.