Emerta A. Aragie, Rui Benfica, Karl Pauw, Josée Randriamamonjy, James Thurlow
{"title":"评估坦桑尼亚包容性农业转型的投资重点","authors":"Emerta A. Aragie, Rui Benfica, Karl Pauw, Josée Randriamamonjy, James Thurlow","doi":"10.1111/dpr.12812","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Motivation</h3>\n \n <p>Policy-makers dealing with conflicting development goals and constrained budgets must comprehend the relative cost effectiveness of agricultural and rural development initiatives.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Purpose</h3>\n \n <p>We assess the impact of alternative interventions on development outcomes—economic growth, job creation, poverty reduction, and diet quality—to inform decision-making and resource allocation in Tanzania's agriculture. We analyse trade-offs among development objectives and explore budget reallocation to enhance the efficiency of public spending.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Approach and methods</h3>\n \n <p>We used a computable general equilibrium (CGE) model linked top-down with microsimulation modules to simulate the impact of public investment options.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Findings</h3>\n \n <p>No single option emerges as the most effective across all development objectives. Investments in improved inputs and extension for horticulture and cash crops stand out for diet quality and employment creation. Livestock services show consistently high rankings across multiple objectives. Investments to boost cereals and root crops promote growth and reduce poverty but do little to increase employment and diet quality.</p>\n \n <p>Budget reallocation towards more cost-effective interventions can significantly enhance the development effectiveness of Tanzania's agricultural expenditures and would substantially increase cumulative gross domestic product growth between 2019 and 2028.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Policy implications</h3>\n \n <p>Policy-makers can use the findings to design and prioritize agricultural interventions that better align with broader development objectives. Tanzania can achieve higher benefits and contribute to overall development goals by reallocating resources towards more cost-effective expenditure options.</p>\n </section>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":51478,"journal":{"name":"Development Policy Review","volume":"42 6","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Assessing investment priorities for inclusive agricultural transformation in Tanzania\",\"authors\":\"Emerta A. Aragie, Rui Benfica, Karl Pauw, Josée Randriamamonjy, James Thurlow\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/dpr.12812\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div>\\n \\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Motivation</h3>\\n \\n <p>Policy-makers dealing with conflicting development goals and constrained budgets must comprehend the relative cost effectiveness of agricultural and rural development initiatives.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Purpose</h3>\\n \\n <p>We assess the impact of alternative interventions on development outcomes—economic growth, job creation, poverty reduction, and diet quality—to inform decision-making and resource allocation in Tanzania's agriculture. We analyse trade-offs among development objectives and explore budget reallocation to enhance the efficiency of public spending.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Approach and methods</h3>\\n \\n <p>We used a computable general equilibrium (CGE) model linked top-down with microsimulation modules to simulate the impact of public investment options.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Findings</h3>\\n \\n <p>No single option emerges as the most effective across all development objectives. Investments in improved inputs and extension for horticulture and cash crops stand out for diet quality and employment creation. Livestock services show consistently high rankings across multiple objectives. Investments to boost cereals and root crops promote growth and reduce poverty but do little to increase employment and diet quality.</p>\\n \\n <p>Budget reallocation towards more cost-effective interventions can significantly enhance the development effectiveness of Tanzania's agricultural expenditures and would substantially increase cumulative gross domestic product growth between 2019 and 2028.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Policy implications</h3>\\n \\n <p>Policy-makers can use the findings to design and prioritize agricultural interventions that better align with broader development objectives. Tanzania can achieve higher benefits and contribute to overall development goals by reallocating resources towards more cost-effective expenditure options.</p>\\n </section>\\n </div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":51478,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Development Policy Review\",\"volume\":\"42 6\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-10-09\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Development Policy Review\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"96\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/dpr.12812\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"经济学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"DEVELOPMENT STUDIES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Development Policy Review","FirstCategoryId":"96","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/dpr.12812","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"DEVELOPMENT STUDIES","Score":null,"Total":0}
Assessing investment priorities for inclusive agricultural transformation in Tanzania
Motivation
Policy-makers dealing with conflicting development goals and constrained budgets must comprehend the relative cost effectiveness of agricultural and rural development initiatives.
Purpose
We assess the impact of alternative interventions on development outcomes—economic growth, job creation, poverty reduction, and diet quality—to inform decision-making and resource allocation in Tanzania's agriculture. We analyse trade-offs among development objectives and explore budget reallocation to enhance the efficiency of public spending.
Approach and methods
We used a computable general equilibrium (CGE) model linked top-down with microsimulation modules to simulate the impact of public investment options.
Findings
No single option emerges as the most effective across all development objectives. Investments in improved inputs and extension for horticulture and cash crops stand out for diet quality and employment creation. Livestock services show consistently high rankings across multiple objectives. Investments to boost cereals and root crops promote growth and reduce poverty but do little to increase employment and diet quality.
Budget reallocation towards more cost-effective interventions can significantly enhance the development effectiveness of Tanzania's agricultural expenditures and would substantially increase cumulative gross domestic product growth between 2019 and 2028.
Policy implications
Policy-makers can use the findings to design and prioritize agricultural interventions that better align with broader development objectives. Tanzania can achieve higher benefits and contribute to overall development goals by reallocating resources towards more cost-effective expenditure options.
期刊介绍:
Development Policy Review is the refereed journal that makes the crucial links between research and policy in international development. Edited by staff of the Overseas Development Institute, the London-based think-tank on international development and humanitarian issues, it publishes single articles and theme issues on topics at the forefront of current development policy debate. Coverage includes the latest thinking and research on poverty-reduction strategies, inequality and social exclusion, property rights and sustainable livelihoods, globalisation in trade and finance, and the reform of global governance. Informed, rigorous, multi-disciplinary and up-to-the-minute, DPR is an indispensable tool for development researchers and practitioners alike.