Measuring the Environmental Impacts of Agricultural Research: Theory and Applications to CGIAR Research

Four case studies of the non-market valuation of environmental impacts of agricultural research are reported, drawing on the methods outlined in chapter 1. The International Centre for Agricultural Research in the Dry Areas (ICARDA) estimated the impact of supplemental irrigation in wheat growing areas of Syria on the extent of groundwater depletion and soil salinity accumulation. The estimated benefits across the wheat growing areas of Syria ranged from zero to more than 423 million Syrian Pounds (SYP) (US$8.5 million) per annum. This variability is attributable to different assumptions about the fate of the water ‘saved’ under supplemental irrigation. The Indian Council for Agricultural Research (ICAR) valued environmental benefits from the introduction of zero tillage (ZT) in ricewheat systems in the Indo-Gangetic Plains, valued at US$142 per person in the region when presented to them as a ‘water saving strategy’. The International Water Management Institute (IWMI) examined the impact on flora and fauna of a change in sluice gate operations in the Mekong delta, implemented by the Vietnamese government following research carried out by IWMI. On average, individual households living in the region were willing to pay between US$39 and US$73 per annum for this change in operations, and that between 12% and 15% of this is attributable to favorable changes in flora and fauna, yielding an aggregate value of up to US$200,000 per annum. The International Potato Center (CIP) case study tracked changes in potato diversity over time in Peru, using choice modeling to explore the trade-offs farmers make between modern and native varieties. The full analysis of this data remains outstanding, but the potential extent to which 23 Professor, Crawford School of Economics and Government, The Australian National University, Canberra ACT 0200, Australia. Email: jeff.bennett@anu. edu.au. farmers are willing to trade-off improved yield with reduced biodiversity is indicated. These cases demonstrate that tools exist to enable economic valuation of non-market costs and benefits of the impacts from agricultural research, but that a number of challenges remain. These relate primarily to expertise gaps within the CGIAR Centers and to the financial costs of getting accurate data. Lessons for mainstreaming and resourcing environmental impact assessment in the CGIAR are outlined.