This evaluation of EBRD’s Agribusiness sector operations, completed in 2023, examined 12 policy dialogue and technical assistance engagements in 5 countries (Egypt, Ukraine, Tunisia, Kirgiz Republic and Turkey) where EBRD and FAO closely collaborated with a view of enhancing food security and safety, through improved policies, laws, regulations and practices. Food security became particularly critical for many developing countries, as the Russia’s invasion of Ukraine disrupted their supply chains and presented a challenge to ensure sufficient food supplies. At the same time, the increase of value-added export of other types of agricultural products (such as olive oil or horticultural crops) has become a strategic objective of many north African governments and needed policy support to comply with increasing food safety regulations prevailing in their principal export markets of the EU.

The evaluation demonstrates how through close collaboration, the FAO sector’s policy experts and EBRD’s small business advisory specialists, lawyers and bankers, addressed key issues (both, preceding and then created by the food security crisis).

The evaluation revealed that the FAO/EBRD’s collaborative actions made a substantial contributions to the enhancement of food safety and quality policies and standards in Ukraine and Egypt, as well as to some extent in Tunisia. The results in the Kirgiz Republic and Turkey were modest so far, however the project in the former was still ongoing, while the policy adjustment objectives in the latter were quite ambitious and politically sensitive.

In Egypt, using their unique expertise, both institutions worked on demand and supply sides to help maintain food supply equilibrium in the context of the looming crisis. The results of this collaboration included change of policies, which brought halving of grain imports process’ costs and enabling entry into the new markets for Egyptian horticultural producers. Similarly in Tunisia, a parallel application of FAO’s expertise in olive oil production and marketing, as well as EBRD’s knowledge of private sector development needs, resulted in strong outcomes. The projects supported inclusiveness and diversity by providing training to large share of women and youth.

The evaluation also examines cases in Ukraine (before the war) where EBRD and FAO worked with the private sector meat producers on the increase of food safety standards, as well as with the government on policies and regulations to enable agricultural cooperatives. The first type of cooperation achieved impressive reduction rates in the occurrence of animal diseases and the increase in meat quality, while the second brought a new legislation, promoting collaboration among farmers, including women-led cooperatives.

The results of this intra-institutional collaboration in Turkey were modest. The lessons learned included phasing of ambitious policy-related objectives and ensuring continuation of political support by engaging representatives of the President's office (were changes of personnel are less frequent). Despite some achievements, the overarching goals proved to be too challenging (and politically too sensitive), while less than perfect collaboration from the recipient’s side contributed to limited success of this project so far.

The projects and policy changes had clearly positive impact on inclusiveness and diversity, with more women and youth benefiting from capacity building and marketing/export promotion training in the olive oil sector in Tunisia. IT sector SMEs employing young entrepreneurs were also subcontracted for the project in the Kirgiz Republic. About 30% of Egyptian grain inspectors were women.

Tomasz Bartos is an Associate Director, Senior Evaluation Manager with the Independent Evaluation Department of the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development (EBRD) in London. His career there spans almost 30 years, first as a Senior Banker, specializing in the infrastructure and urban sectors and since 2010 as an evaluator. He led more than 20 sectoral and thematic evaluations, concentrating on the assessment of the implementation of the EBRD’s strategies and programmes. Before joining EBRD, he worked at the Inter-American Development Bank and the International Development Research Centre (IDRC) in Ottawa, Canada. He holds MBA and the Graduate Diploma in International Development from the University of Ottawa.

Introduction

We have passed the halfway point to the 2030 Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) and only about 15 per cent of countries are on track to meet the goals. In the push for progress on SDG 2 (Zero Hunger) there have been several calls emphasizing the importance of improving food systems and reducing high rates of malnutrition. Evidence from impact evaluations and systematic reviews can help identify what interventions work for improving food systems and nutrition outcomes.

Evidence and gap maps (E&GMs) are a way to capture and systematise evidence from such studies. By presenting evidence in a structured framework, E&GMs help policymakers and practitioners find the most relevant evidence to inform their decisions. By making research gaps clear, E&GMs also support the research community in collaborating to fill key knowledge gaps. As new evidence on these topics is constantly emerging, a “static” map would become out of date quickly, highlighting the need for “living” evidence products to keep decision makers informed about the latest developments in the field.

Methods

3ie’s E&GM, produced in cooperation with the Deutsche Gesellschaft für Internationale Zusammenarbeit (GIZ), systematically maps all impact evaluations and systematic reviews on the effects of food systems interventions on nutrition and food security in low- and middle-income countries. This is a “living” E&GM that has been updated regularly over the past three years. The map covers interventions in the food supply chain, food environment and consumer behavior.

Findings and interpretations

As of our 7th update, our E&GM, includes 2,682 impact evaluations and 232 systematic reviews. We have added 876 studies since the first version of the E&GM was published in January 2021. The regular updates have identified several important trends and developments, highlighting the importance of living evidence resources.

The living nature of the E&GM has allowed us to respond to stakeholders’ need for access to evidence on women’s empowerment. Our discussions with GIZ about the need for evidence on this topic led us to expand our framework, which uncovered 29 additional impact evaluations of empowerment interventions. For women’s empowerment outcomes we found an additional 87 studies over the update period.

Updates to the E&GM have also found several studies evaluating areas identified as gaps in the original E&GM. These include studies on interventions like on-farm post-harvest processing, food taxes, and food subsidies. The updates have also captured studies on understudied outcomes like food loss, environmental impacts of food system outcomes, and measures of diet insufficiency. However, multiple gaps remain, including advertising and labelling regulations, cold-chain initiatives, food packaging and innovative store design.

Conclusion

The E&GM provides up-to-date access to evidence for decision makers and researchers. The continual updates ensure it remains a useful and current tool for informing decisions about effective strategies for improving food systems and reducing hunger and malnutrition, while also highlighting where gaps remain in the evidence base that should be prioritized in future research.

Mark Engelbert is a senior evaluation specialist for the International Initiative of Impact Evaluation (3ie). He manages 3ie’s Development Evidence Portal and works on synthesis products. Previously, Mark was a consultant for multiple development organizations. He has a PhD in Philosophy, a Masters in International Development, and Bachelors in Philosophy.

Ingunn Storhaug is a research assistant for the International Initiative for Impact Evaluation (3ie) with 4 years’ experience working on several synthesis products. She holds an MSc in Social Policy and Social Research from University College London (UCL), and a BA in Social Policy and Sociology from Middlesex University.

Crisis and redrafting of welfare systems have negative outcomes in rural areas where both the rarefaction of services and the possibility of exclusion from the public protection network are more evident. Although the attention to the inner areas has evidenced the role of the services for the dynamism of the territories, it hasn’t always facilitated the rethinking on the necessary principles of innovation, adding resources that have buffered the needs without changing the models. In rural areas, testing innovative services by mobilizing resources and facilitating active participation is crucial. Here, a new welfare-mix capable of including responsible farms to their communities can mark the difference.

Social Farming (SF) works in a complex scenario of previously unknown challenges/opportunities that link the need to provide services/answers to growing needs with the possibility of innovating and revitalizing the rural social fabric with inclusive participatory processes. The work starts from the analysis of SF projects supported by Measure 16.9 of RDP/EAFRD/2014-2022/RegioneToscana to reflect on the innovation introduced. The projects through the functioning of composite partnerships (TGC/TAP between farms, social cooperatives, social enterprises, third sector, universities and public entities with functions of planning/management of social-health services and social assistance) organize new social, social-health and educational services in the communities, enhancing the multifunctionality of agricultural processes and businesses. By activating agricultural resources, networks broaden a new and uniform access to essential services for people, families and rural communities, creating and enhancing organizational models to support new, effective, sustainable and transferable inclusive practices. Collaborative learning has been used as framework to co-design the projects through working groups involving all stakeholders. The University of Pisa participates in several projects in various rural areas of Tuscany with monitoring and evaluation tasks. Beneficiaries belong to various groups with social fragility/disadvantage supported by the social and social-health services. In terms of inclusivity the projects focus on the needs of different groups of users (people with mental and physical disabilities, people with autism/down syndrome, migrants, political refugees etc) SF represents an innovative laboratory of inclusion and extension of the network of services by developing substantial relationships. By giving value to the available resources, the farms offer both life’s opportunities in active and protected environments and active and controlled participation in the agricultural processes. The users, in protected and welcoming places adapted to enhance their skills, contribute to the agricultural tasks and they are included in a community properly organized to receive and to support them. The creation of inclusive environments and networks activated on new resources enhance people’s skills and increase the quality of rural life with paths that ensure inclusion, skills’ strengthening and consolidation of human relationships respectful of diversity. In this way they increase the positive reputation and the acceptance of the territories. Regenerative community networks activated in partnerships and sharing and raising responsibilities between a plurality of actors represent positive potential elements of SF. To measure the outcomes of inclusive processes, methodological tools have been co-designed, such as questionnaires -for partners, stakeholders, and users- and focus groups with partners (ex-ante and ex-post). The heterogeneity of the beneficiares and the difficulty to involve different stakeholders in the evaluation process represented some challenges. In this work we present the preliminary results of the economic and sociological evaluation of some projects in the final phase. The evaluation of the projects aims to provide elements to understand and to improve SF practices, to verify the opportunity to combine efficiency and innovation with pathways complementary to traditional services, testing its effectiveness/efficiency and providing lessons for policy design.

Francesco Paolo Di Iacovo, Professor of Agricultural Economics at the Department of Veterinary Science, University of Pisa, carries out research on Social Transition and Social Innovation focusing on Social development of rural areas and Social Farming.

Leonardo Catena, Sociologist and Researcher (RtdA) at the Department of Veterinary Science, University of Pisa, carries out research on local welfare and comparative social policies, not self-sufficiency and social-health policies, evaluation of educational institutions, school-work alternation and gender studies.

Giulia Granai, young PhD Student in Veterinary Sciences at the Department of Veterinary Science, University of Pisa, carries out research on Social Innovation, Nature Based Solutions