Dataset Information

Projecting potential impact of COVID-19 on major cereal crops in Senegal and Burkina Faso using crop simulation models.

ABSTRACT:

Context

The rapid emergence of COVID-19 could have direct and indirect impacts on food production systems and livelihoods of farmers. From the farming perspective, disruption of critical input availability, supply chains and labor, influence crop management. Disruptions to food systems can affect (a) planting area; and (b) crop yields.

Objectives

To quantify the impacts of COVID-19 on major cereal crop's production and their cascading impact on national economy and related policies.

Methods

We used the calibrated crop simulation model (DSSAT suite) to project the impact of potential changes in planting area and grain yield of four major cereal crops (i.e., rice, maize, sorghum, and millet) in Senegal and Burkina Faso in terms of yield, total production, crop value and contribution to agricultural gross domestic product (GDP). Appropriate data (i.e., weather, soil, crop, and management practices) for the specific agroecological zones were used as an input in the model.

Results and conclusions

The simulated yields for 2020 were then used to estimate crop production at country scale for the matrix of different scenarios of planting area and yield change (-15, -10, -5, 0, +5, +10%). Depending on the scenario, changes in total production of four cereals combined at country levels varied from 1.47 M tons to 2.47 M tons in Senegal and 4.51 M tons to 7.52 M tons in Burkina Faso. The economic value of all four cereals under different scenarios ranged from $771 Million (M) to $1292 M in Senegal and from $1251 M to $2098 M in Burkina Faso. These estimated total crop values under different scenarios were compared with total agricultural GDP of the country (in 2019 terms which was $3995 M in Senegal and $3957 M in Burkina Faso) to assess the economic impact of the pandemic on major cereal grain production. Based on the scenarios, the impact on total agricultural GDP can change -7% to +6% in Senegal and - 8% to +9% in Burkina Faso.

Significance

Results obtained from this modeling exercise will be valuable to policymakers and end-to-end value chain practitioners to prepare and develop appropriate policies to cope or manage the impact of COVID-19 on food systems.

SUBMITTER: Jha PK

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7893291 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:OBJECTIVE:To evaluate the 12-month total direct costs (medical and nonmedical) of delivering subcutaneous depot medroxyprogesterone acetate (DMPA-SC) under three strategies - facility-based administration, community-based administration and self-injection - compared to the costs of delivering intramuscular DMPA (DMPA-IM) via facility- and community-based administration. STUDY DESIGN:We conducted four cross-sectional microcosting studies in three countries from December 2015 to January 2017. We estimated direct medical costs (i.e., costs to health systems) using primary data collected from 95 health facilities on the resources used for injectable contraceptive service delivery. For self-injection, we included both costs of the actual research intervention and adjusted programmatic costs reflecting a lower-cost training aid. Direct nonmedical costs (i.e., client travel and time costs) came from client interviews conducted during injectable continuation studies. All costs were estimated for one couple year of protection. One-way sensitivity analyses identified the largest cost drivers. RESULTS:Total costs were lowest for community-based distribution of DMPA-SC (US$7.69) and DMPA-IM ($7.71) in Uganda. Total costs for self-injection before adjustment of the training aid were $9.73 (Uganda) and $10.28 (Senegal). After adjustment, costs decreased to $7.83 (Uganda) and $8.38 (Senegal) and were lower than the costs of facility-based administration of DMPA-IM ($10.12 Uganda, $9.46 Senegal). Costs were highest for facility-based administration of DMPA-SC ($12.14) and DMPA-IM ($11.60) in Burkina Faso. Across all studies, direct nonmedical costs were lowest for self-injecting women. CONCLUSIONS:Community-based distribution and self-injection may be promising channels for reducing injectable contraception delivery costs. We observed no major differences in costs when administering DMPA-SC and DMPA-IM under the same strategy. IMPLICATIONS:Designing interventions to bring contraceptive service delivery closer to women may reduce barriers to contraceptive access. Community-based distribution of injectable contraception reduces direct costs of service delivery. Compared to facility-based health worker administration, self-injection brings economic benefits for women and health systems, especially with a lower-cost client training aid.