Innovation has the potential to boost agricultural production, improve food security, and help farmers build resilience against climate change. It also has the potential to help mitigate the estimated quarter to a third of global emissions (IPCC, 2019) due to agriculture and food systems.
Multiple adaptation innovations are ready to transition to scale, with rigorous evidence of impact and cost-effectiveness, not only for the innovation itself but also for ways of increasing farmer adoption. They have the potential to boost the resilience of hundreds of millions of people in low- and middle-income countries. For example, AI is revolutionizing the ability to produce weather forecasts to inform agriculture in tropical settings, and multiple studies find that farmers respond to weather forecast information. Similarly, there is strong evidence that farmers respond to digital agricultural advisory messages. Digital agriculture systems can cost-effectively transmit weather information, help farmers adopt new agricultural practices, and connect with extension workers and firms. New and adapted seed varieties can improve climate resilience. Low-cost training of farmers can increase the adoption of land management practices that improve moisture retention and boost climate resilience. Innovative credit and insurance products, such as asset-collateralized loans, enable farmers’ investment in climate resilience, with additional benefits for food security, agricultural productivity, and income. Climate-resilient social protection schemes, such as weather-responsive anticipatory cash transfers, enable precautionary investments to improve resilience. Graduation programs help people in climate-change-affected regions move out of poverty and diversify their income streams. The main child mortality impact of climate change is expected to be through malnutrition, and a simplified protocol to treat severe and moderate acute malnutrition reduces costs while increasing coverage.
Multiple mitigation innovations that provide substantial co-benefits in low- and middle-income countries also have rigorous evidence of impact and value for money and are ready for transition to scale. For example, leaf color charts reduce the use of synthetic nitrogen fertilizer, an important source of agricultural emissions, while saving money for farmers. Payments for ecosystem services can reduce crop residue burning, not only reducing emissions but also very cost-effectively reducing mortality from air pollution. New types of improved cookstoves reduce emissions while generating substantial savings for users from reduced fuel purchases.
There is also a strong case for investments in a portfolio of high-expected-return earlier-stage innovations, some of which have transformative potential for cost-effectiveness at scale. Initial investments could be made in the next stage of R&D, with subsequent investments dependent on results. Microbial fertilizers could reduce the need for synthetic nitrogen, reducing emissions and improving yields. Self-propagating hybrid seeds with climate-resilient traits could increase yields while decreasing barriers to sustained adoption. While many alternative protein manufacturers are currently focusing on high-income consumers, investments in R&D on approaches that could be lower-cost are also worthwhile. Methane emissions from cattle could be reduced through manipulating rumen microbial processes through feed additives or gene editing, livestock vaccines, and breeding for low methane-producing animals. New and improved satellite and remote sensing measurement systems could potentially enable a host of other innovations. These could include better weather forecasting, improved soil chemistry mapping, and a broader use of payments for ecosystem services, whether for planting and maintaining trees, reducing crop burning, or incentivizing alternate wetting and drying in rice cultivation to reduce methane emissions. Enhanced rock weathering and biological carbon sequestration methods could potentially turn agriculture from a net carbon emitter into a carbon sink.
While commercial R&D incentives have led to the development and scaling of some agricultural innovations, including some adaptation innovations in high-income countries, commercial incentives for other types of innovation fall far short of their social value, leading to underinvestment in R&D. For example, animal feeds that reduce methane emissions would generate social value far in excess of their commercial value, since farmers currently have limited incentives to reduce methane use. Improved satellite measurement techniques could enable a host of other innovations. Self-propagating hybrid seeds with traits that enhance climate resistance would be socially valuable, but under current institutions, seed developers might have trouble recovering their investment. Many promising innovation areas also receive limited support from national public research agencies, either because they are regional or global public goods or because they primarily affect low-income countries with different ecological and economic environments than higher-income countries that account for the bulk of public R&D spending.
Innovation funding has a track record of generating very high social rates of return. Advancing these innovations also provides option value in a context in which there is uncertainty and substantial tail risk regarding the extent of climate change and its impact on agriculture and food security. Innovation investments returns can be maximised by implementing appropriate procedures to manage the risk of failure associated with innovation investments. This includes focusing large-scale funding to transition innovations to scale on those with rigorous evidence of impact and cost-effectiveness, not just for the innovation itself, but also on ways to increase uptake. When transitioning innovations to scale, it is typically appropriate to build in support to adapt the innovation for scaling, conduct A/B tests to refine the innovation, and, when possible, build in rigorous impact evaluation to confirm that it continues to have impact and be cost-effective at scale. In some cases, it is possible to limit risk for the funder while harnessing the creativity and energy of the private sector to address the world’s most pressing environmental and social needs, through “pull mechanisms” that pay based on results. Funders could support specific innovations or groups of innovations, or could support a new innovation fund or mechanism based on these principles.
This document provides examples of innovations to illustrate the need for additional work, both to transition innovations to scale and to explore earlier-stage innovations. Chapter I focuses on ready-to-scale adaptation innovations that are prepared for widespread implementation. Chapter II focuses on ready-to-scale mitigation innovations that generate substantial co-benefits for people in low and middle-income countries. Chapter III focuses on high-potential earlier-stage innovations. In response to donor and policymaker interest, this draft document discusses a subset of innovations in more detail. This list of innovations is not meant to be comprehensive.