18 APRIL 2008 VOL 320 SCIENCE www.sciencemag.org 320 R ecent scientific assessments (1–4) have alerted the world to the increasing size of agriculture’s footprint, including its contribution to climate change and degradation of natural resources (5). By some analyses, agriculture is the single largest threat to biodi- versity (6). Agriculture requires more land, water, and human labor than any other industry (7). An estimated 75% of the world’s poor and hungry live in rural areas and depend directly or indirectly on agriculture for their livelihoods (8). As grain commodity prices rise and per capita grain production stag- nates (9), policy-makers are torn be- tween allocating land to food or fuel needs. The governance of agriculture requires new thinking if it is to meet the needs of humanity now and in the future. The International Assessment of Agricultural Science and Tech- nology for Development (IAASTD) brought together governments, inter- national organizations, and private sec- tor and civil society organizations to address these challenges (10). The task was to assess the current state and future potential of formal and informal knowledge, as well as science and tech- nology (S&T), (i) to reduce hunger and poverty, (ii) to improve rural liveli- hoods, and (iii) to facilitate equitable, sustainable development. The IAASTD recently released its assess- ment (11). The assessment acknowledges the enormous historical contributions of S&T to increased yields, nutrition, and aggregate wealth but also recognizes that gains have been uneven and that successes have been accompa- nied by environmental and social conse- quences. Production increases have not consis- tently improved food access for the world’s poor. Where production has been intensified, it has generally been accompanied by costs such as extensive eutrophication from fertilizer run- off, pesticide contamination, and loss of local crop landraces (12). The assessment found that structural changes in governance, develop- ment, and delivery of S&T are required so that benefits are shared more equitably and envi- ronmental impacts are lessened. Controversy arising from the assessment’s findings (13–15) has focused on a single ele- ment of the study, namely, the role of trans- genics, particularly genetically modified (GM) crops. The assessment, however, was tasked with appraising the contribution of a diversity of S&T approaches to the combined social, environmental, and production goals. GM tech- nology was not rejected in principle; the assess- ment found GM crops appropriate in some contexts, unpromising in others, and unproven in many more. The potential of GM crops to serve the needs of the subsistence farmer is rec- ognized, but this potential remains unfulfilled. No conclusive evidence was found that GM crops have so far offered solutions to the broader socioeconomic dilemmas faced by developing countries. Here, we, as IAASTD authors, sum- marize the wider key actions identified in the assessment and the solutions they offer. Redirection of agricultural S&T. Inadequate attention has been devoted to the generation, dissemination, and uptake of S&T that ad- dresses the needs of the rural poor and to devel- oping technologies that lessen the environmen- tal impacts of agriculture. A meager one-third (about U.S. $10 billion) of all global research expenditure on agriculture is spent on solving the problems of agriculture in developing coun- tries (16), home to ~80% of the global popula- tion. This amount is less than 3% of the total value of agricultural subsidies that countries of the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) pay to maintain their agricultural output (16). Consequently, regions with severe biophysical constraints and marginalized communities have historically benefited least from S&T development (17). In the next two decades, cli- mate change is predicted to cause major crop losses in the world’s poorest regions (18). The driest areas of the world are already home to more than 2 billion people. Agricultural S&T has yet to offer effective rural management options for crop and livestock sys- tems appropriate for water- constrained dry lands and stress conditions. Except for the Consultative Group on Inter- national Agricultural Research (CGIAR) (19), few others have sought crop improvements in the small-grain cereals, tubers, and legumes cultivated by hundreds of millions of farmers. Will private sector companies lead this re- direction? There is plenty of scope for them to play a vital role, as they already dominate the research landscape. Private sector investments in agricultural research and development (R&D) reached more than $12 billion in 2000, 30 times the budget of the entire CGIAR inter- national agricultural research system (20). A redirection of S&T is needed to move away from processes that have profited primarily large-scale enterprises to processes that ad- dress the most basic needs of the world’s 900 million small farmers. The availability and cost of good-quality seed, especially in sub- Saharan Africa, pose real constraints for poor farmers (21), as does severe soil degradation and post-harvest losses. POLICY FORUM The present path of agricultural development will not achieve development goals according to a recent assessment, but a solid foundation for improvements exists. Agriculture at a Crossroads E. Toby Kiers, 1 * Roger R. B. Leakey, 2 Anne-Marie Izac, 3 Jack A. Heinemann, 4 Erika Rosenthal, 5 Dev Nathan, 6 Janice Jiggins 7 ECOLOGY Farmer participation Funding for affordable technology development Governance to allow public deliberation of S&T Access to trade and market analysis Funding for higher education Access to natural resources Building local expertise Approaches Redirection Generation of S&T Policy and planning of S&T Access and exchange of S&T Capacity development IPR to support farmer innovation Regional and international forums to drive S&T planning Governmental regulation of private sector New information and communication tools for rural communities Decentralized R&D facilities Rural to urban supply chains Research networks Arrangements, laws, regulations Translating redirection of agricultural S&T into concrete approaches, arrangements, laws, and regulations. 1 Institute of Ecological Science, Faculty of Earth and Life Sciences, Vrije Universiteit, De Boelelaan 1085, NL-1081 HV Amsterdam, Netherlands. 2 James Cook University, School of Marine and Tropical Biology, Cairns, Queensland, Australia. 3 Alliance of the CGIAR Centres, c/o IFAD, 200 Via del Serafico, Rome, Italy. 4 School of Biological Sciences, University of Canterbury, Christchurch, New Zealand. 5 Center for International Environmental Law, 1350 Connecticut Avenue, NW, Suite 1100, Washington, DC, USA. 6 Institute for Human Development, New Delhi, India. 7 Communication and Innovation Studies, Wageningen University Research, Wageningen, Netherlands. *Author for correspondence. E-mail: ekiers@falw.vu.nl Published by AAAS on April 17, 2008 www.sciencemag.org Downloaded from