Toward Productive, Inclusive, and Sustainable Farms and Agribusiness Firms — page 1

Page 1 of 238 · Preview

Toward Productive, Inclusive, and Sustainable Farms and Agribusiness Firms — page 2

Page 2 of 238 · Preview

Toward Productive, Inclusive, and Sustainable Farms and Agribusiness Firms — page 3

Page 3 of 238 · Preview

Toward Productive, Inclusive, and Sustainable Farms and Agribusiness Firms — page 4

Page 4 of 238 · Preview

Toward Productive, Inclusive, and Sustainable Farms and Agribusiness Firms — page 5

Page 5 of 238 · Preview

Toward Productive, Inclusive, and Sustainable Farms and Agribusiness Firms — page 6

🛡

You have reached the preview limit

The free preview includes the first 6 pages of 238. Download the original document to read the full content.

⬇ Download document

Page 6 of 238 · End of preview

The full document has 238 pages. Downloads happen on the original source site.

Toward Productive, Inclusive, and Sustainable Farms and Agribusiness Firms

Washington, DC

🛡CC BY 3.0 IGOPermitted use with attribution

pages: 238
Format: PDF
Size: 15.4 MB
Views: 0
Downloads: 0

↗Will open at the source site: World Bank Open Knowledge Repository

Source: World Bank Open Knowledge Repository ↗ · Report an issue

Shared byDeepak Banerjee›

Abstract

The purpose of the evaluation is to assess how relevant and effective the World Bank Group has been in its support for agrifood system development (AFSD) —that is, in developing more productive, inclusive, and sustainable farms and agribusiness firms. The evaluation finds that the Bank Group’s interventions (FY 2010–20) were broadly relevant, although gaps remain in scaling up and better targeting support to countries that need it the most. Bank Group interventions were also effective overall in improving productivity, inclusion, and sustainability, but less so in LICs, particularly in West and Central Africa. World Bank interventions that focused on supporting production were less successful than interventions that combined production and market approaches. World Bank support for improving productivity was insufficiently diversified toward higher-value products that offer multiple benefits. IFC agribusiness investments faced challenges meeting environmental and social (E&S) standards, especially in LICs. IEG offers three recommendations to enhance Bank Group support for AFSD. (i) To enhance its effectiveness in developing agrifood systems, the World Bank Group’s efforts to support production technologies should be complemented by efforts to improve market access, especially in LICs and in countries at the traditional stage of agrifood system development. These can be pursued through synergies in Bank Group interventions or with partners; (ii) To achieve more sustainable agrifood systems, where conditions permit, the World Bank Group should support production diversification to meet the growing demand for undersupplied high-value-added, nutritious products while ensuring that smallholder farmers and SMEs benefit from the diversification; and (iii) To enhance the contribution of IFC support for AFSD, IFC should pilot and adopt more effective ways to support clients to better meet E&S Performance Standards, especially in LICs.

Related documents

Bangladesh Development Update, October 2026: Make Subsidies and Social Protection Work Better for the Poor

Estimating Extinction Threats with Species Occurrence Data from the Global Biodiversity Information Facility

Potential for Biofuels for Transport in Developing Countries

Migrants as Social Protection? Simulations of a Market for Work Permits

Capital Markets

Fertility Decline in Pakistan 1980-2006