AgResults is a $152 million multilateral initiative that uses Pay-for-Results prize competitions to incentivize, or “pull”, the private sector to overcome agricultural market barriers by investing in innovative research and delivery solutions that improve the lives of smallholder farmers. At our core we are an experiential learning initiative, continuously building evidence on what works, and what does not, in using prize competitions to spur sustainable market change.Read more about our approach
Smallholder Farmers Reached
Current and Past Projects
Prize Funds Awarded (approx)
June 16, 2021
This is the second in a series to provide an overview of the five phases of AgResults’ approach to Pay-for-Results prize competition design. You can find the first blog post here. For more information about the entire process, check out the full design toolkit that was published in February 2021.
Have an idea for a Pay-for-Results prize competition but looking for a proven way to gauge its feasibility?
We are pleased to share our “Analyzing Feasibility” design brief, the second in a series of five briefs that summarize AgResults’ approach to designing Pay-for-Results prize competitions. In this brief (linked here), we explain how program designers can analyze a prize concept’s viability to assess if it has merit to proceed to a prize structuring phase.
By researching relevant market systems, designers can articulate a Theory of Change to project how a prize competition can achieve systemic change. Focusing on target beneficiaries, government and donor activities, and key private sector actors can also help designers reasonably estimate impacts for the proposed competition to decide whether to proceed with its implementation.
Keep an eye out for the third design brief on “Structuring Prizes” that will be published soon!...
May 25, 2021
This is the first in a series to provide an overview of the five phases of AgResults’ approach to Pay-for-Results prize competition design. For more information about the entire process, check out the full design toolkit that was published in February 2021.
Are you interested in applying Pay-for-Results prizes to your development program but not sure how to start designing the best prize competition?
We are pleased to share our “Concept Sourcing” design brief, the first in a series of five briefs that summarize AgResults’ approach to designing Pay-for-Results prize competitions. In this brief (linked here), we explain how program designers begin the process by brainstorming potential development challenges to see if a prize competition could address them.
By conducting initial concept sourcing research, analyzing the market, and evaluating the concept, designers can assess multiple ideas against an objective rubric and decide which ideas merit a deeper investigation. Being strategic from the start maximizes the chance that these competitions will successfully encourage private sector actors to develop and scale solutions that overcome local market challenges and improve the well-being of smallholder farmers.
Keep an eye out for the second design brief on “Analyzing Feasibility” that will be published soon!...
May 3, 2021
These days, with the shift toward blended finance in development funding, Pay-for-Results (PfR) prizes and other pull mechanisms are gaining momentum to solve market challenges. But they are still not widely understood. A recent World Bank webinar series explored different facets of AgResults’ experience with PfR prize competitions.
Hosted by the World Bank’s Open Learning Campus, “Pay-for-Results: From Concept to Design to Lessons Learned” comprised three hourlong sessions, unpacking the initiative’s overall goals, best practices in prize design, and learning over the last eight years. Each session featured remarks from a representative from AgResults’ Steering Committee followed a short presentation, culminating in a robust Q&A with the audience. Chris Brett, Lead Agribusiness Specialist at the World Bank and AgResults Steering Committee member, moderated the three sessions.
“The funding landscape is really shifting toward blended finance and private sector resources,” said Mr. Brett. “We’re trying to demonstrate how important it is for the private sector to invest and transform agricultural markets.”
The first session, “What are Pay-for-Results Prizes and Why Do They Matter?” (full recording here) took place on April 15 and introduced AgResults’ PfR prize competition model, highlighting certain contexts in which it can be a powerful method that engages the private sector and drives resilience.
“We’re looking at questions of effectiveness and cost-effectiveness to see how pull mechanisms do versus push mechanisms,” said Orin Hasson, who represents the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation on the AgResults Steering Committee. “There are certain places where this approach works really well and others where it does not.”
The session also reflected on opportunities and challenges around embedding Pay-for-Results approaches into the larger business environment.
“We’re creating mini enabling environments that encourage the private sector to scale these technologies and create a more resilient and functional market,” said Justin Kosoris of the AgResults Secretariat.
The second session, “Designing Impactful Prizes to Address Development Challenges,” (full recording here) took place on April 22, focusing on AgResults’ prize design process. During this webinar, the experts provided an overview of the five phases of prize design, from concept sourcing through prize structuring to verification.
Attendees learned about AgResults’ recent prize design toolkit, an interactive PDF that provides step-by-step instructions on the design process and includes real-life examples and worksheets to teach best practices.
“As donors, a fundamental goal is to intervene in markets in a way that achieves the most positive, long-lasting development impacts for the least cost,” said Tristan Armstrong, who represents the Australian Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade on the AgResults Steering Committee. “Through experimentation and iterative design optimization, AgResults has built evidence about what does and what doesn’t spur sustainable market change.”
The third session, “Learning from 8 Years of Using Prizes to Transform Markets” (full recording here) took place on April 29 and explored the most important – and surprising – learning from AgResults. During the hour, the panel reflected on lessons that have emerged from prize sourcing and design, competition launch, and project oversight. The discussion highlighted the value of learning from both success and failure.
“If we expect people to take risks - and we do that in most of our programs - we have to accept that a lot of what we do won't work,” said Alan Tollervey, who represents the UK Foreign, Commonwealth, and Development Office (FCDO) on the AgResults Steering Committee. “But by drilling into the reasons why things have been less successful, we can really capture the key evidence of what’s happened.”
As the third session wrapped up, it was clear to attendees that AgResults is well-positioned to contribute to the development sector’s collective knowledge about how, when, and where to apply Pay-for-Results for maximum impact.
“Now we’re at the richest phase of AgResults yet,” said Rodrigo Ortiz of the AgResults Secretariat. “We have lessons, we have results. We want to make this a mainstream methodology – which is not to say that it should be used in every case – but Pay-for-Results is a tool just the same as you have other tools. And we have the robust evidence base to prove it.”
For more information, check out the recordings of all three sessions:
The World Bank’s Open Learning Campus (OLC) provides dynamic learning opportunities where diverse audiences around the world can learn at their own pace and access critical knowledge and materials to tackle development challenges....
As the development funding landscape shifts toward blended finance, Pay-for-Results (PfR) prizes and other pull mechanisms are gaining momentum to solve market challenges. But PfR approaches are still not widely used; they are complex to design, and their exact application can seem elusive. An upcoming World Bank webinar series featuring AgResults aims to unpack some of these issues.
Hosted by the World Bank’s Open Learning Campus, “Pay-for-Results: From Concept to Design to Lessons Learned” runs on three consecutive Thursdays (April 15, April 22, April 29). Each hourlong session, from 9-10 a.m. ET, highlights a different aspect of AgResults’ PfR prize competition model, proceeding from the initiative’s overall goals to best practices in prize design to learning over the last eight years. After introductory remarks by a donor representative, each session includes a short presentation by AgResults, followed by a robust discussion that invites real-time participation from the audience.
Below are more details about each of the sessions.
Pay-for-Results prizes and other pull mechanisms are gaining momentum to solve complex market challenges. This webinar introduces AgResults’ Pay-for-Results prize competition model and shows why it’s a key method for development donors and practitioners to apply in the right contexts.
One reason that Pay-for-Results (PfR) mechanisms are not more widely used is that they are complex to design. This webinar summarizes AgResults’ PfR prize design process and introduces participants to a new, easy-to-follow toolkit.
Since 2013, AgResults has designed and implemented Pay-for-Results prize competitions that engage the private sector to solve complex agricultural challenges. This webinar captures the most important – and surprising – learning from those eight years.
The World Bank’s Open Learning Campus (OLC) provides dynamic learning opportunities where diverse audiences around the world can learn at their own pace and access critical knowledge and materials to tackle development challenges. AgResults is pleased to partner with the OLC on this series....
March 5, 2021
“If Africa wants to be ready to address the challenges it is facing in its food and agriculture systems to become more resilient and inclusive, it’s urgent that African agriculture satisfies the food and nutrition needs of its growing populations.”
Dr. Jonas Chianu, Chief Agricultural Economist from the African Development Bank, offered this call to action as part of his keynote address on Day 2 of the “Scaling Agricultural Innovations through Commercialization for Sustainable Food System Transformation.” Co-hosted by the International Institute of Tropical Agriculture (IITA) and the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, this webinar series explored how research institutions and private companies should collaborate to scale agricultural technologies and strengthen food systems over three days (March 2-4). AgResults joined a panel on Day 2 to demonstrate how Pay-for-Results prizes can create a supportive enabling environment.
Using presentations and breakout rooms, Day 1 of the series looked at how partnerships between research institutions and private companies can foster sustainable market models. The conversations illuminated that although scaling up any agricultural innovation is challenging, the arena becomes much more complex when those technologies are focused on social impact, not just productivity.
Day 2 focused on how public and private actors can create an enabling environment that facilitates scale-up of agricultural technologies. Marcella McClatchy from the Gates Foundation set the stage, explaining that government regulations, standards, and access to finance all contribute to shaping an enabling environment that encourages scale.
After Dr. Chianu’s keynote address urging collaboration across public and private sectors, Moderator Garron Hansen of Chemonics International engaged the different panelists to share their experiences shaping enabling environments.
Ndidi Nwuneli from Sahel Consulting Agriculture & Nutrition Ltd started off the discussion, emphasizing how supportive political and financial frameworks encourage sustainable scale-up of technologies.
“If you don’t address finance and policy issues, then you are setting yourself up for failure,” said Ms. Nwuneli. “Policy must be ecosystem-focused and must be done at the national and local levels.”
During his remarks, Rodrigo Ortiz illustrated how AgResults’ prize competitions actively anticipate and address enabling environment influences through strategic design. By structuring the competition to account for factors like access to finance, government policies, and time to build trust, AgResults embeds sustainability into its design to drive scaling of agricultural technologies.
“The reason we use prizes is because they offer a unique value-add over traditional funding. Prizes heighten awareness and create an opportunity to inform and mobilize,” Mr. Ortiz explained. “That market awareness is necessary for uptake and growth of future demand.”
Several panelists from the public sector highlighted the government’s role in setting standards to drive commercialization.
“We need farmer education to help them adopt the right practices and use the right technologies,” said Peter Kaigwara, Director of Market Surveillance for the Kenya Bureau of Standards. “We need to increase the testing capacity along the entire value chain.”
Alex Dodoo of the Ghana Standards Authority agreed, saying that the government needs to create a framework for measuring progress.
“The government needs to develop metrics to measure specific outcomes that align with our goals of commercialization,” Mr. Dodoo said.
Day 2 was an opportunity to reaffirm that collective action among public and private stakeholders is needed to ensure that technologies are accessible for smallholder farmers across the continent and the world.
“The already well-known barriers to scaling agricultural innovations must be systematically removed to create impact and adoption,” Dr. Chianu said. “Sharing of responsibilities must concretely begin now.”
Drawing from the discussions over the first two days, Day 3 looked to the future of food systems to understand which types of interventions will work best to commercialize agricultural technologies. The panelists shared a range of perspectives on how best to incorporate these goals into real policies and investment decisions.
In this way, the webinar series effectively engaged research institutions and the private sector to answer the question of how best to accelerate the scaleup of key innovations to improve food safety and nutrition in 21st century food systems.
For more information about the Scaling Agricultural Innovations through Commercialization for Sustainable Food System Transformation, including supplementary materials, visit the event page....
March 3, 2021
By Rodrigo Ortiz
As the world prepares to recover economically from COVID-19, it’s key that we find ways to scale agricultural innovations so that the most vulnerable are included in the path forward. Smallholder farmers must be able to access innovations to improve their resilience to external shocks and to strengthen food systems. Prize competitions, such as those designed and implemented by AgResults, are an effective way to actively engage the private sector in this scaling, using monetary incentives to show businesses why it is lucrative to invest resources in a yet untapped but developing market.
Yet prize competitions do not occur in a vacuum. They take place in a specific context and thus are subject to the policies and influences that shape that enabling environment ecosystem. For example, governmental control on commodity prices could stifle the entry of new actors and market growth. Our experience is that more liberal policies incentivize innovation and sustainability.
By anticipating influences in the enabling environment – such as access to finance, policy, and the time to test and adopt new technologies – and crafting the prize structure accordingly, AgResults’ Pay-for-Results model embeds the goal of post-project sustainability into the intervention right from the design stage. In this way, AgResults’ prize competitions can create an enabling environment that supports the delivery and scale-up of agricultural technologies to smallholder farmers.
Although prize competitions use monetary incentives to initially encourage the private sector to act differently, we have learned that it’s crucial to facilitate relationships with financial institutions early to establish timely cash flow. Prizes spark interest for the private sector and encourage them to venture into untapped markets. Prize competitions demand innovation, but for the private sector, innovating means deviating from ‘normal’ operations and putting capital at risk. The speed of adoption and scaling hinges on private sector competitors reinvesting short-term profits and prizes. Prize competitions provide prizes and incentives allowing smaller producers to reinvest their earning and prizes until they become credit worthy. Only with continued access to credit can businesses afford to reallocate resources and restructure their operations to achieve desired scale in the shorter term.
In Tanzania, AgResults’ competition built in a step early on to bring financial institutions and competing dairy input suppliers together. Two banks demonstrated the available credit facilities to competing dairy input suppliers, discussing their specific situations and laying the groundwork for future loans. By convening these meetings early on, AgResults encouraged the competing businesses to think more deeply about mobilizing funds and created the impetus for sustained relationships with banks that will be critical to their long-term scaling of technologies for dairy farmers.
It’s essential to anticipate political economy influences – particularly the strict policies that often accompany commodities – when designing competitions. Rather than seeking out contexts with ‘positive’ government policies, the key is to look for the absence of hindering or fluctuating policies. Such policies can constrain the market when prize-driven competition starts to bubble up. These same policies will stifle chances of scale-up into a new sector or through new distribution channels.
Our competition in Zambia, which aimed to increase consumption of Vitamin A biofortified products, ran into governmental roadblocks because it was targeting a staple and highly politicized food commodity. Commodity markets are often vulnerable to fluctuating policies and political interventions. Price and export controls and distortions deterred maize millers and seed companies from investing in sales and distribution, ultimately stalling the competition before it ever took off.
In contrast, an open government stance on exports and trade can pave a path to widespread adoption of agricultural technologies. In Nigeria, a more open governmental approach around export of maize encouraged the preconditions would translate scaling of AflasafeTM into increased trade of high-quality maize. AgResults ran workshops and events to encourage competitors to lobby the government to set a standard for aflatoxin levels in crops, focusing efforts locally and regionally to influence policies that directly impacted their operations. As the competition progressed, we continued to engage the government for post-competition regulation – all of which hinged on the existing approach to encourage market growth rather than overly control it.
Because smallholder farmers are risk-averse, they need time to observe the efficacy of a technology before committing precious resources. We’ve learned to build in time for early adopters to test a new product so they can trust the process and be convinced of its utility before expanding to widespread adoption.
The first few years of the Nigeria project started slowly. Competitors that joined the project initially worked with a small number of farmers because they wanted to test the product and see evidence that it worked before promoting it more widely among their farmers. Because so many competitors insisted on testing AflasafeTM on demonstration plots, adoption and participation were limited in the competition’s early years. This delay taught us that building in time for early adopters to test a new product would eventually expand the competitor pool as late adopters observed the benefits of investments and risks taken by more pioneering companies. And eventually, the entire market system benefited as use of AflasafeTM scaled.
AgResults weighs the influence of a range of enabling environment elements on project context when designing interventions. That way, we can better set up the potential for scaling from the start and proactively develop a market-based incentive scheme to stimulate initial demand and overcome food security challenges. As we continue to embed plans for sustainability at the design stage to address – and overcome, as needed – enabling environment influences, we can more strategically encourage the private sector to play a central role in scaling technologies. And as these technologies get into the hands of smallholder farmers, we can set the preconditions for future food systems that are stronger and more resilient....