Micro Investment Climate Survey 2006

This research is part of India 2006 Investment Climate Survey initiative that focused on enterprises in the manufacturing, retail, micro (unorganized), and software/information technology sectors. A separate survey was conducted for each sector.

India 2006 Micro Investment Climate Survey targeted establishments with 10 or fewer full-time paid employees. The research covered 1549 manufacturing enterprises from Delhi, Ludhiana, Mumbai, Thane, Howrah and Hyderabad. The following industries were surveyed: auto components, drugs and pharmaceuticals, chemicals, electrical goods, electronics, food processing, garments, leather, textiles, metal and machine tools.

Unorganized (micro) manufacturing employs the vast majority of India’s manufacturing workforce. Unorganized manufacturing firms are not integrated into the supply chain, thus limiting the transfer of technology. Possibly due to the legacy of the small scale reservation policy, much of the manufacturing activity in the unorganized sector is geared toward producing final products for the consumer market, rather than intermediate products and parts for the organized sector.

Being part of the organized sector, often referred to as the “formal sector,” increases a firm’s bargaining power (for example, it has easier access to finance). However, international experience suggests that despite the advantages, unorganized enterprises often wish to remain informal, because organized firms are subject to more regulations. In India, the 10-worker threshold is especially important because labor laws on wages and benefits are applied to units above this size. Firms can avoid being part of the organized sector in two ways: operating “under the radar” by simply not registering, or by not growing.

The Investment Climate Surveys (ICS) collected information on the investment climate constraints the sectors faced, such as infrastructure, access to land, relationship with the court system, crime, government administration, use of financial services, and labor force. In addition, the surveys collected basic information on the firms, such as ownership structure, number of years of operations, and revenues and costs. The data and results from the ICS were intended to help develop policy reforms that would further promote growth and productivity of firms in India.

Agricultural Science and Technology Indicators: 2018 Global Food Policy Report Annex Table 1

Policy makers recognize that increased investment in agricultural research is key to increasing agricultural productivity. Despite this, many low- and middle-income countries struggle with capacity and funding constraints in their agricultural research systems. Agricultural Science and Technology Indicators (ASTI), led by the International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI), within the portfolio of the CGIAR Research Program on Policies, Institutions, and Markets works with national, regional, and international partners to collect time series data on the funding, human resource capacity, and outputs of agricultural research in low- and middle-income countries. Based on this information, ASTI produces analysis, capacity-building tools, and outreach products to help facilitate policies for effective and efficient agricultural research.

Indicators

“Agricultural research” includes government, higher education, and nonprofit agencies, but excludes the private for-profit sector. Total agricultural research spending includes salaries, operating and program costs, and capital investments for all agencies (excluding the private for-profit sector) involved in agricultural research in a country. Expenditures are adjusted for inflation and expressed in 2011 prices. Purchasing power parities (PPPs) measure the relative purchasing power of currencies across countries by eliminating national differences in pricing levels for a wide range of goods. PPPs are relatively stable over time, whereas exchange rates fluctuate considerably. In addition to looking at absolute levels of agricultural research investment and capacity, another way of comparing commitment to agricultural research is to measure research intensity—that is, total agricultural research spending as a percentage of agricultural output (AgGDP).

“Total agricultural researchers” includes all research agencies (excluding the private for-profit sector) in a country. Totals are reported in full-time equivalents (FTEs) to account for the proportion of time researchers actually spend on research activities. A critical mass of qualified agricultural researchers is crucial for implementing a viable research agenda, for effectively communicating with stakeholders, and in securing external funding. Therefore, it is important to look at the share of PhD-qualified researchers. Gender balance in agricultural research is important, given that women researchers offer different insights and perspectives that can help research agencies more effectively address the unique and pressing challenges of female farmers. Age imbalances among research staff should be minimized. Having too many PhD-qualified researchers approaching retirement age can jeopardize the continuity of future research.

Research involves unavoidable time lags from the point when investments are made until tangible benefits are attained; in the interim, long-term,
stable funding is required. The volatility coefficient measures the volatility of agricultural research spending by applying the standard deviation formula to average one-year logarithmic growth of agricultural research spending over a certain period. A value of 0 indicates “no volatility”; countries with values between 0 and 0.1 are classified as having “low volatility”; countries with values between 0.1 and 0.2 are considered to have “moderate volatility”; and countries with values above 0.2 fall into the “high volatility” category.

Surveillance and early warning systems for climate sensitive diseases in Vietnam and Laos (PestForecast)

A warmer, wetter world is likely to be sicker. The Mekong is a hotspot for human, animal and plant disease and some of the most important are highly sensitive to climate and climate changes. These diseases impose enormous burdens on human health and the agricultural sector and hinder broader development. Better tackling climate sensitive disease requires better information and tools. The projected identified a portfolio of climate-based information systems that target important diseases and are used successfully in other countries. Action research was implemented to adapt these tools for Vietnam and ensuring delivery through partnerships. The outcome is farming communities are able to take practical action to reduce disease risk and/or benefit from risk-mitigating action by health providers. The impacts were better health, reduced economic loss from disease, increased food security, and ecosystems protected from disease spillover and misuse of agricultural chemicals.