Using a variety of inputs, SPAM uses a cross-entropy approach to make plausible estimates of crop distribution within disaggregated units.
Moving the data from coarser units such as countries and subnational provinces, to finer units such as grid cells, reveals spatial patterns of crop performance, creating a global gridscape at the confluence between geography and agricultural production systems.
Improving spatial understanding of crop production systems allows policymakers and donors to better target agricultural and rural development policies and investments, increasing food security and growth with minimal environmental impacts
And, Hormel Foods, of course!
Many people and institutes provided data or comments/feedback to SPAM.
In particular we’d like to thank the following people:
(Any remaining errors are solely our responsibility)
The Spatial Production Allocation Model is an effective way to map detailed patterns of crop production using much less specific input data. A variety of information sources are used to generate plausible, disaggregated estimates of crop distribution, which are useful for understanding production and land use patterns. Identifying where trends take place is important for understanding why they take place. Understanding the location of production relative to a country’s infrastructure, services, and other sectors will enable better planning, allocation of resources, and targeting of interventions. Knowing the detailed patterns of productivity will help diagnose and target underperforming areas.
The enhanced knowledge of agricultural production systems and associated livelihood strategies that spatially disaggregated crop data yield can form the basis of rural development strategies. Given the enormous diversity and site-specific nature of many African production systems—as well as their associated cultural, socioeconomic, and resource management issues—effective development strategies should account for such spatial patterns. These strategies require a framework that takes into account the opportunities and constraints of different development options within a specific geographic area, thus allowing policymakers to select the appropriate plan based on the area’s characteristics.
Using GIS to analyze production and productivity patterns offers ways to understand and manipulate how geography affects agriculture through policy interventions. SPAM’s outputs are also uniform in resolution and structure, meaning they are more easily introduced and manipulated within a GIS than the irregular structures of political or administrative boundaries in which statistics are usually compiled. Traditional statistical agricultural data does not allow for production shares to be calculated by agro-ecological zones that span geopolitical boundaries.
SPAM results have been widely used within and outside IFPRI. The model and its outputs are the key elements in the organization’s global change research, including the HarvestChoice program, climate change work, and regional research and development priority setting within IFPRI for East Africa and West. Analysts at the Consultative Group on International Agricultural Research (CGIAR) centers, the World Bank, the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO), as well as researchers at universities and in developing country national agricultural research systems, have applied SPAM outputs in their work.
If we missed you, please let us know!
Alejandro, N., M. Johnson, E. Magalhaes, X. Diao, L. You, and J. Chamberin. 2009. Priorities for realizing the potential to increase agricultural productivity and growth in Western and Central Africa. IFPRI discussion paper 00876.
Dorosh, P., H. Wang, L. You, and E. Schmidt. 2009. Crop Production and Road Connectivity in Sub-Saharan Africa: A Spatial Analysis. Africa Infrastructure Country Diagnostic Working Paper 19.
Haggblade, S., S. Longabaugh, and D. Tschirley. 2009. Spatial patterns of food staple production and marketing in South East Africa: implications for trade policy and emergency response. Food Security International Development Working Papers 100.
Lall, S.V., E. Schroeder, and E. Schmidt. 2009. Identifying Spatial Efficiency-Equity Trade Offs in Territorial Development Policies Evidence from Uganda. World Bank Policy Research Working Paper 4966.
Thornton, P.K., P.G. Jones, G. Alagarswamy, J. Andresen, and M. Herrero. 2009. Adapting to climate change: Agricultural system and household impacts in East Africa. Agricultural Systems In Press, Corrected Proof.
Ulimwengu, J., J. Funes, D. Headey, and L. You. 2009. Paving the way for development: the impact of infrastructure on agricultural production and household wealth in the Democratic Republic of Congo. Presented at Agricultural and Applied Economics Association 2009 Annual Meeting. Milwaukee, Wisconsin.
You, L., and M. Johnson. 2008. Exploring Strategic Priorities for Regional Agricultural R&D Investments in East and Central Africa. IFPRI Discussion Paper 00776.
You, L., S. Wood, and U. Wood-Sichra. 2009. Generating plausible crop distribution maps for Sub-Saharan Africa using a spatially disaggregated data fusion and optimization approach. Agricultural Systems 99:126-140.
You, L., C. Ringler, C.N. Gerald, U. Wood-Sichra, R. Robertson, S. Wood, Z. Guo, T. Zhu, and Y. Shn. 2009b. Torrents and Trickles:Irrigation Spending Needs in Africa. Africa Infrastructure Country Diagnostic Background Paper 9.
Gruère, G., B.t. Antoine, and S. Mevel. 2007. Genetically modified food and international trade the case of India, Bangladesh, Indonesia, and the Philippines. IFPRI Discussion Paper 00740.
Pender, J. 2007. Agricultural Technology Choices for Poor Farmers in Less-Favored Areas of South and East Asia. IFPRI Discussion Paper 00709.
Nelson, G.C., and R.D. Robertson. 2008. Green gold or green wash: environmental consequences of biofuels in the developing world. Review of Agricultural Economics 30:517-529.
Wood, S., L. You, and X. Zhang. 2004. Spatial patterns of crop yields in Latin America and the Caribbean. EPTD discussion paper No.124.
You, L., and S. Wood. 2006. An entropy approach to spatial disaggregation of agricultural production. Agricultural Systems 90:329-347.
Zapata-Caldas, E., G. Hyman, H. Pachón, F.A. Monserrate, and L.V. Varela. 2009. Identifying candidate sites for crop biofortification in Latin America: case studies in Colombia, Nicaragua and Bolivia. International Journal of Health Geographics 8.
Gruère, G., S. Mevel, and A. Bouët. 2009. Balancing productivity and trade objectives in a competing environment: should India commercialize GM rice with or without China? Agricultural Economics 40:459-475.
Kostandini, G., B.F. Mills, S.W. Omamo, and S. Wood. 2009. Ex ante analysis of the benefits of transgenic drought tolerance research on cereal crops in low-income countries. Agricultural Economics 40:477-492.
Skalsky, R., Z. Tarasovicov , J. Balkovic, E. Schmid, M. Fuchs, E. Moltchanova, G. Kindermann, and P. Scholtz. 2009. GEO-BENE global database for bio-physical modeling v. 1.0. Geobene Public Research Documents.
You, L., S. Wood, and U. Wood-Sichra. 2006. Generating global crop distribution maps: from census to grid. Selected Paper prepared for presentation at the American Agricultural Economics Association Annual Meeting, California, July 23-27, 2006.
You, L., S. Wood, and K. Sebastian. 2008. Comparing and synthesizing different global agricultural land datasets for crop allocation modeling. The International Archives of the Photogrammetry, Remote Sensing and Spatial Information Sciences 37:1433-1440.
You, L. 2009. A tale of two countries: spatial and temporal patterns of rice productivity in China and Brazil. IFPRI Discussion Paper 00758.