Skip to main content

Main menu

  • Home
  • About
  • Who we are
  • News
  • Events
  • Publications
  • Search

Secondary Menu

  • Independent Science for Development CouncilISDC
    • Who we are
    • News
    • Events
    • Publications
    • Featured Projects
      • Inclusive Innovation
        • Agricultural Systems Special Issue
      • Proposal Reviews
        • 2025-30 Portfolio
        • Reform Advice
      • Foresight & Trade-Offs
        • Megatrends
      • QoR4D
      • Comparative Advantage
  • Standing Panel on Impact AssessmentSPIA
    • About
      • Who We Are
      • Our Mandate
      • Impact Assessment Focal Points
      • SPIA Affiliates Network
    • Our Work
      • Country Studies
        • Community of Practice
        • Bangladesh Study
        • Ethiopia Study
        • Uganda Study
        • Vietnam Study
      • Causal Impact Assessment
        • Call for Expressions of Interest: Accountability and Learning Impact Studies
      • Use of Evidence
      • Cross-Cutting Areas
        • Capacity Strengthening
        • Methods and Measurement
        • Guidance to IDTs
    • Resources
      • Publications
      • Blog Series on Qualitative Methods for Impact Assessment
      • SPIA-emLab Agricultural Interventions Database
    • Activities
      • News
      • Events
      • Webinars
  • Evaluation
    • Who we are
    • News
    • Events
    • Publications
    • Evaluations
      • Science Group Evaluations
      • Platform Evaluations
        • CGIAR Genebank Platform Evaluation
        • CGIAR GENDER Platform Evaluation
        • CGIAR Excellence in Breeding Platform
        • CGIAR Platform for Big Data in Agriculture
    • Framework and Policy
      • Evaluation Method Notes Resource Hub
      • Management Engagement and Response Resource Hub
      • Evaluating Quality of Science for Sustainable Development
      • Evaluability Assessments – Enhancing Pathway to Impact
      • Evaluation Guidelines
  • Independent Science for Development CouncilISDC
  • Standing Panel on Impact AssessmentSPIA
  • Evaluation
Back to IAES Main Menu

Secondary Menu

  • Who we are
  • News
  • Events
  • Publications
  • Featured Projects
    • Inclusive Innovation
      • Agricultural Systems Special Issue
    • Proposal Reviews
      • 2025-30 Portfolio
      • Reform Advice
    • Foresight & Trade-Offs
      • Megatrends
    • QoR4D
    • Comparative Advantage
Prashanth Vishwanathan/IWMI
Blog

A Place for Foresight and Trade-Offs

You are here

  • Home
  • Independent Science for Development CouncilISDC
  • News
  • A Place for Foresight and Trade-Offs

As policymakers across the world grapple with the possible trade-offs from shutdowns to decrease what some are calling the third—and hopefully final wave—of COVID-19, One CGIAR is using foresight and trade-off analyses to prepare for alternative futures related to food and nutrition security. As we enter the new year, hindsight shows no one was truly prepared for the health implications of the pandemic or the economic and social turmoil that would ensue and wreak havoc on livelihoods worldwide. This year is crucial for the world to address the pandemic. The year 2021 also is key for One CGIAR to define its new Research Initiatives in a post-pandemic reality.

In early 2020, the Independent Science for Development Council (ISDC) commissioned two foresight reviews focusing on the five societal and environmental One CGIAR impact areas and a trade-off report.  

  • Nutrition, health, and food security
  • Poverty reduction, livelihoods, and jobs
  • Gender equality, youth, and social inclusion
  • Climate adaptation and mitigation
  • Environmental health and biodiversity

These commissioned studies provided the necessary background for an ISDC consensus around reflections and recommendations to inform the drafting of the CGIAR 2030 Research and Innovation Strategy that will guide One CGIAR for the next decade. To reach a more global agricultural and food systems (AFS) research and international development audience, Q Open invited the authors of the studies to appear in Q Open’s inaugural open access issue. ISDC authored the introductory essay, the CGIAR Foresight Team co-leads presented a commentary, and the commissioned foresight reviews and trade-off report were adapted into articles for a global audience. 

  • Introduction
    • Foresight and trade-off analyses: Tools for science strategy development in agriculture and food systems research
  • Commentary
    • Commentary on foresight and trade-off analysis for agriculture and food systems
  • Articles
    • Looking across diverse food system futures: Implications for climate change and the environment
    • Food and agriculture systems foresight study: Implications for gender, poverty, and nutrition
    • Trade-off analysis of agri-food systems for sustainable research and development

Through the next decade, AFS will face considerable changes and obstacles, including major demographic shifts, technological advances, disease and health challenges, climate change, and economic and governance instability, all of which will undoubtedly affect food and nutrition security. Although the papers included in Q Open explored foresight and trade-off analyses within the context of the One CGIAR reform, these lessons apply broadly to any international development or research organization.

If you are unfamiliar with foresight and trade-offs, you may not be alone. Foresight analysis explores different plausible future scenarios and their possible impacts. Both the public and private sectors use foresight to monitor drivers of change and research gaps in possible futures using such methods as scenario planning, trend and megatrend analysis, and visioning and backcasting. Trade-off analysis is more commonly used among economists and studies how much, if any, of gains in one wanted outcome must be sacrificed to achieve gains in one or more wanted outcomes. Even with rigorous foresight methods, the exact future is unknown, and trade-offs are inevitable in AFS because of the natural complexities and interactions within systems.

As the One CGIAR reform continues, the next decade of Research Initiatives will include the “use of foresight and trade-off assessment during project development and implementation." This issue of Q Open examined how both foresight and trade-off analyses are valued tools in organizational strategy development to help assess possible futures and their intended—and unintended—impacts. Join us as we explore future AFS alternative realities.

Share on

Science ISDC
Jan 15, 2021

Written by

  • Amy R. Beaudreault

    Lead, ISDC Secretariat

Related News

Posted on
09 Apr 2025

Join ISDC: Vacancies for Chair and New Members

Posted on
26 Mar 2025
by
  • Ines Gonzalez de Suso
  • Amy R. Beaudreault

ISDC 101: The Nuts & Bolts of the CGIAR Independent Science for Development Council

Posted on
16 Dec 2024
by
  • Domagoj Vrbos
  • Ines Gonzalez de Suso

Thoughts from Inside the Secretariat: Our ISDC Year in Review

More News

Related Publications

Assessments & Commentaries
Science ISDC
Issued on 2024

ISDC Review of 2025-2030 Research & Innovation Portfolio Proposals

Assessments & Commentaries
Science ISDC
Issued on 2024

ISDC Feedback on CGIAR Portfolio Narrative 2025-2030

ISDC Feedback on CGIAR Portfolio Narrative 2025-2030
Assessments & Commentaries
Science ISDC
Issued on 2024

ISDC Feedback on CGIAR Portfolio Narrative 2025-2030

More publications

CGIAR Independent Advisory and Evaluation Service (IAES)

Alliance of Bioversity International and CIAT
Via di San Domenico,1
00153 Rome, Italy
  • IAES@cgiar.org
  • (39-06) 61181

Follow Us

  • LinkedIn
  • Twitter
  • YouTube
JOIN OUR MAILING LIST
  • Terms and conditions
  • © CGIAR 2025

IAES provides operational support as the secretariat for the Independent Science for Development Council and the Standing Panel on Impact Assessment, and implements CGIAR’s multi-year, independent evaluation plan as approved by the CGIAR’s System Council.