Sustainable agrifood systems (AFS) provide food security and nutrition without compromising economic, social, and environmental objectives. However, many AFS generate substantial unaccounted for environmental, social, and health costs. True cost accounting (TCA) is one method that adds direct and external costs to find the “true cost” of food production, which can inform policies to reduce externalities or adjust market prices. We find that for Kenya— considering the entire food system, including crops, livestock, fishing, and value addition sectors at the national level—external costs represent 35 percent of the output value. Social costs account for 73 percent of the total external costs, while environmental costs are 27 percent. In contrast, in Viet Nam, where total external costs represent 15 percent of the output value, the environmental costs (75 percent) dominate social costs. At the subnational level, in the three Kenyan counties (Kisumu, Vihiga, and Kajiado) covered by the CGIAR Research Initiative on Nature-Positive Solutions (NATURE+), external costs (or the true cost gap) represent about 30 percent of all household crop production costs. Those external costs are overwhelmingly dominated by social (84 percent) over environmental (16 percent) externalities. In Viet Nam's Sa Pa and Mai Son districts, external costs represent about 24 percent of all household crop production costs. Environmental externalities (61 percent) are greater than social ones (39 percent). In Kenya, forced labor is the main social (and overall) external impact driven by factors ranging from "less severe" financial coercion to "more severe" forms of physical coercion. Land occupation is the most important environmental impact, resulting from occupation of lands for cultivation rather than conservation, while underpayment (low wages) and low profits are important social costs that are closely associated with the prevailing gender wage gap and occurrence of harassment. Soil degradation is the only other environmental impact, linked with the use of inorganic fertilizers (60 percent of households) and pesticides (36 percent). In Viet Nam, land occupation is the most important external impact, followed by soil degradation and contributions to climate change, primarily due to widespread use of inorganic fertilizers (98 percent of households) and pesticides (93 percent). Underpayment and insufficient income are significant social costs, followed by the gender wage gap and child labor. Crop production systems in Kenya exhibit relatively high labor-related costs compared with nonlabor inputs, with relatively lower intensity in the use of inorganic fertilizer and other chemical inputs and lower crop yields. This production system leads to relatively greater social externalities. Conversely, crop yields in Viet Nam are significantly higher than those in Kenya, likely due to the extensive use of inorganic fertilizers representing the largest direct cost component and leading to a relatively higher level of environmental externalities. Because external costs represent a significant part of the total cost of food production, policy and investments to minimize these costs are essential to a nature-positive AFS that is environmentally sustainable and socially equitable. Strategies to reach this goal include regulatory adjustments, investments in resource efficient infrastructure and technologies that minimize costs, and the prudent management of environmentally impactful production inputs and factors.

Although there is an increasing base of literature on extension and advisory services, their role in building resilience in particular has not yet been explored empirically. The literature on resilience in general is itself only in the nascent stage. However, past intervention efforts that attempt to move from emergency responses to long-term development indicate that without well-capacitated systems for implementing interventions, such a transition could be difficult. This brief explores the sustainable-livelihoods framework to conceptualize the capacity needs of resilience-focused extension and advisory services. It indicates where to move the policy and research agenda forward with regard to the role of extension and advisory services in building resilience.

Agricultural transformation and development are critical to the livelihoods of more than a billion small-scale farmers and other rural people in developing countries. Extension and advisory services play an important role in such transformation and can assist farmers with advice and information, brokering and facilitating innovations and relationships, and dealing with risks and disasters. Agricultural Extension: Global Status and Performance in Selected Countries provides a global overview of agricultural extension and advisory services, assesses and compares extension systems at the national and regional levels, examines the performance of extension approaches in a selected set of country cases, and shares lessons and policy insights. Drawing on both primary and secondary data, the book contributes to the literature on extension by applying a common and comprehensive framework — the “best-fit” approach — to assessments of extension systems, which allows for comparison across cases and geographies. Insights from the research support reforms — in governance, capacity, management, and advisory methods — to improve outcomes, enhance financial sustainability, and achieve greater scale. Agricultural Extension should be a valuable resource for policymakers, extension practitioners, and others concerned with agricultural development.

Agricultural extension provides the critical connection from agricultural innovation and discovery to durable improvements at scale, as farmers and other actors in the rural economy learn, adapt, and innovate with new technologies and practices. However, lack of capacity and performance of agricultural extension in lower- and middle-income countries is an ongoing concern. Research on agricultural extension and advisory services (in short, extension) has been an integral part of the CGIAR Research Program on Policies, Institutions, and Markets (PIM) since its inception. This brief synthesizes key findings from research funded by and linked to PIM from 2012 to 2021, presenting lessons learned and a vision for the future of extension. A list of all PIM-related extension and advisory services research is provided at the end. Designing and implementing effective provision of extension is complex, and efforts to strengthen extension services often fall into a trap of adopting “best practice” blueprint approaches that are not well-tailored to local conditions. An expansive literature examines the promises and pitfalls of common approaches, including training-and-visit extension systems, farmer field schools, and many others (Anderson and Feder 2004; Anderson et al. 2006; Waddington and White 2014; Scoones and Thompson 2009). To understand extension systems and build evidence for what works and where, the “best-fit” framework, a widely recognized approach developed by Birner and colleagues (2009) and adapted by Davis and Spielman (2017), offers a simple impact chain approach (Figure 1). The framework focuses on a defined set of extension service characteristics that affect performance: governance structures and funding; organizational and management capacities and cultures; methods; and community engagement — all of which are subject to external factors such as the policy environment, agroecological conditions, and farming-system heterogeneity. To enhance extension performance and, ultimately, a wide range of outcomes and impacts, new and innovative interventions can be applied and adapted within this set of extension characteristics.

This study focuses on the valuation of ecosystem services in Kenya and Vietnam, two countries that have received much attention from the international development community for their biodiversity significance, opportunities for scaling, climate and poverty challenges, and political will. Using The Economics of Ecosystems and Biodiversity (TEEB) framework and the Millenium Ecosystem Assessment (MEA), this study estimates per hectare values of ecosystem services in Kenya and Vietnam based on a systematic literature review of studies on the values of ecosystem services in both countries. Provisioning services, such as medicines, timber, and non-timber forest products were better studied than regulating, supporting and cultural ecosystem services, underscoring the need for further research to better estimate the values of non-tangible services which would improve the estimation of total value of ecosystem services in Kenya and Vietnam. To complement the national level analysis, we selected forest biomes to conduct a value transfer analysis. Forests provide ecosystem service benefits worth $25.78 billion for Kenya and $35.6 billion in Vietnam in 2022 USD. In comparison, the agricultural sector contributed $48.50 billion to Vietnam’s GDP and $24.10 billon to Kenya’s GDP in 2021. The per hectare values for ecosystem services are used in a value transfer analysis to estimate the total value of forest ecosystem services in Vietnam and Kenya. The average per hectare value of ecosystem services provided by forests in Kenya is $5,718.50 ha−1 yr−1 estimated within a range spanning $1,609.44 to $15,606.62 ha−1 yr−1 , while Vietnam's forests demonstrate an average value of $3,650.20 ha−1 yr−1 , with a range of $84.93 to $8,978.16 ha−1 yr−1 . We project the loss of forests into 2050 and estimate the annual economic loss of ecosystem services at $48.08 million for Kenya and $76.29 million for Vietnam, respectively, if deforestation and forest degradation continue at the current rates. Our approach presents a comprehensive overview of diverse ecosystem services, equipping policymakers with a nuanced comprehension of ecosystems’ inherent value. By consolidating values from the literature into a national-level estimate, we provide compelling evidence at a broader scale for informed decision-making. Despite the well-known limitations of value transfer method and with caveats, the values presented in our paper can provide a guiding reference for incorporating these estimations into broader policymaking endeavors.

There are few wage-earning opportunities for the 223 million unemployed or underemployed youth in developing and emerging economies. Many of those young people are in rural areas where the local economy is largely agricultural. Agripreneurship – entrepreneurial activity in agriculture – increases youth employment while teaching them the hard and soft skills they need to manage enterprises profitably and sustainably. This improves their revenue, reduces business failure and fosters innovation in the agrifood systems of tomorrow. The brief explains the principles of investing wisely in such programmes for maximum benefit. This publication is part of the Investment Briefs series under the FAO Investment Centre’s Knowledge for Investment (K4I) programme.

Engaging burgeoning youth populations in developing country agriculture is seen as an important strategy toward effective, efficient, and sustainable food system transformation. Yet the policy, institutional, technological, and capability barriers and ways to overcome them for successful participation of youth in agriculture are not fully understood. We use a conceptual framework that identifies key pathways to prosperity for youth and classifies contextual and driving factors that contribute to the success of youth engagement in agriculture. The framework comprises four broad categories of strategic interventions: policy and socioeconomic environment; institutional; technological/business infrastructure; and individual skills and capacities. In the context of this framework, we then present insights from cases of youth participation in agriculture in five countries: Guatemala, Niger, Nigeria, Rwanda, and Uganda. The countries and cases were purposively selected as part of ongoing research on youth engagement in agriculture. Policies and strategies play an important role in creating an enabling environment for youth engagement in agriculture, including by fostering transparency and accountability in the policy system and promoting youth engagement in the private sector through agricultural extension and other services. Institutions and intermediaries provide financial support, training, and access to market for youth entrepreneurs. Support in these areas should be strengthened. Systems approaches, such as multi-stakeholder platforms, provide holistic support to young agripreneurs (entrepreneurs in agriculture), but require effective coordination. Similarly, information and communication technologies can play a facilitating role by providing platforms to network and receive updated market information but need to be significantly scaled up. Individual capacities can drive youth engagement in agriculture and agripreneurship but must continue to be built up through expanded education and training on technical and functional skills. As policymakers and program managers search for interventions that can promote youth involvement in agriculture in their own countries, the insights from the five countries examined that are presented in this paper may be useful for identifying context-specific challenges and pathways to successful youth engagement in agriculture in their own countries. The framework presented here can be applied to study youth engagement issues in any country or in sub-national, decentralized contexts to generate evidence to guide the design of youth-in-agriculture development programs. There is a need to support, strengthen, and implement the driving factors identified in this paper for expanding youth engagement in agriculture.

The report’s main objective is to describe socio-economic conditions and agricultural systems in the survey areas. It provides a baseline assessment characterizing the main agricultural and socioeconomic challenges within the surveyed localities, and to inform the array of research interventions currently underway. Furthermore, the study will provide a baseline for estimating the impacts of NATURE+ (including waste management, water management, development or a resilient seed system, development of value chains for neglected and underutilized species, participatory varietal selection, encouragement of designs for increasing agrobiodiversity, etc.) on inclusion, poverty reduction, as well as on food security, livelihoods, and jobs. The report is structured as follows: Section 2 presents detailed information on the survey design, its coverage and implementation. Sections 3 and 4 discuss the main analytical results of the report, separately for the household and the workers survey, respectively. Finally, section 5 concludes.

Investing in farmers – or agriculture human capital – is crucial to addressing challenges in our agrifood systems. A global study carried out by the FAO Investment Centre and the International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI), with support from the CGIAR Research Program on Policies, Institutions, and Markets (PIM) and the FAO Research and Extension Unit, looks at agriculture human capital investments, from recent trends to promising initiatives. This toolkit aims to provide investors including policymakers, government officials, international and national development banks and the private sector, with the evidence, analysis, guidance and processes to make sounder investment decisions on projects, programmes and policies that strengthen farmers’ capacities. This publication is part of the Investment Toolkits series under the FAO Investment Centre's Knowledge for Investment (K4I) programme.

The Asia-Pacific region houses 52% of the world's 767.9 million undernourished people. Although the prevalence of undernourishment in Viet Nam nearly halved from 2000 to 2019, progress slowed due to climate change, conflict, and other factors. Some 5.1 million people, or 5.2% of the population in Viet Nam are undernourished (FAO 2021). In rural areas, particularly among ethnic groups, these rates are higher. For instance, household food insecurity in rural districts in the Vietnamese Mekong Delta prevalence was 34.4% and 48.4% in the last month and last year, respectively. The rates of stunting and underweight among children aged under five in ethnic groups in Viet Nam remain at 31.4% and 21% respectively, according to the National Institute of Nutrition (2023).