CGIAR Initiative: Market Intelligence <p class="ql-align-justify">Decisions on how to invest scarce resources in CGIAR genetic innovation systems are predominantly supply-driven, and therefore potentially out-of-sync with the demands of smallholders, consumers and&nbsp;agro-industry. While returns on investment in genetic innovation have been high (<a href="https://doi.org/10.1111/ajae.12255" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="_blank" style="color: rgb(5, 99, 193);">Alston&nbsp;<em>et al</em>., 2022</a>), they tend to fall below potential. Mismatched investments reduce options to channel&nbsp;support&nbsp;towards activities with higher potential to contribute to Impact Areas such as gender&nbsp;equality, climate change adaptation, and nutrition. The turnover of improved crop varieties developed by CGIAR and its partners has been slow as indicated by a high average age of varieties in the field (<a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gfs.2017.01.008" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="_blank" style="background-color: rgb(225, 227, 230); color: rgb(0, 0, 0);">Atlin&nbsp;<em>et al</em>., 2017</a>;&nbsp;<a href="https://doi.org/10.1177/0030727021989346" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="_blank" style="color: rgb(5, 99, 193);">McEwan&nbsp;<em>et al</em>., 2021</a>;&nbsp;<a href="https://doi.org/10.1111/ijfs.14684" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="_blank" style="color: rgb(5, 99, 193);">Thiele&nbsp;<em>et al</em>., 2021</a>;&nbsp;<a href="https://cas.cgiar.org/sites/default/files/pdf/ISPC_DIIVA_synthesis_report_FINAL.pdf" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="_blank" style="color: rgb(5, 99, 193);">Walker&nbsp;<em>et al</em>., 2014</a>). Moreover, farmers may not be well informed about varietal options available to them, and reluctant to experiment with new varieties (<a href="https://doi.org/10.1177%2F0030727019900520" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="_blank" style="background-color: rgb(225, 227, 230); color: rgb(0, 0, 0);">Rutsaert&nbsp;and Donovan, 2020</a>). Small-scale seed businesses lack incentives to actively promote new varieties given weak demand, preferring instead to target marketing resources towards more established varieties.&nbsp;Indeed, little is known about the institutional and behavioral drivers of varietal replacement and product substitution, and the role of downstream market actors such as traders, processors, and consumers in this process.&nbsp;</p><p class="ql-align-justify">There is clear recognition of the need for&nbsp;demand- and&nbsp;data-driven processes to guide genetic innovation systems (<a href="https://excellenceinbreeding.org/announcement/crops-end-hunger-funders-announce-six-requests" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="_blank" style="color: rgb(5, 99, 193);">EiB, 2020</a>), but efforts to advance this remain incomplete and fragmented within CGIAR. Current product profile design is strongly biased towards agronomic and stress tolerance traits (<a href="https://doi.org/10.1007/s00122-019-03317-0" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="_blank" style="color: rgb(5, 99, 193);">Cobb&nbsp;<em>et al</em>., 2019</a>), with little systematic identification and integration of traits that contribute to wider social impact such as, for example, gender equality, opportunities for youth, social inclusion, and nutrition.&nbsp;Greater data-driven processes require that social scientists (e.g., gender and marketing specialists, and economists), geospatial scientists, nutritionists, and representatives from national breeding programs, among others, engage&nbsp;with&nbsp;breeding&nbsp;and&nbsp;seed system&nbsp;programs&nbsp;providing&nbsp;timely and useful&nbsp;“market intelligence.”&nbsp;&nbsp;</p><p class="ql-align-justify">We&nbsp;define&nbsp;“market intelligence”&nbsp;as&nbsp;<em>strategic information&nbsp;on future crops, market segments and trait priorities&nbsp;aligned to the needs and preferences of farmers, agri-business and consumers&nbsp;that can be incorporated into product profiles, pipeline investment cases&nbsp;and seed system strategies,&nbsp;enabling&nbsp;genetic innovation systems to contribute to the five Impact Areas</em>. Since plant breeding takes time, product profiles must capture the future needs and preferences of customers (women and men&nbsp;farmers, value chain actors, consumers) and society by anticipating “<em>future trends in international and domestic markets for the commodity and its by-products, dietary patterns, urbanization,&nbsp;labour&nbsp;and land markets, structural transformation of economies, domestic, regional and international policies, abiotic and biotic stress incidence and severity, environmental conditions and climate</em>” (<a href="http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.gfs.2016.05.005" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="_blank" style="background-color: rgb(225, 227, 230); color: rgb(0, 0, 0);">Custodio&nbsp;<em>et al</em>., 2016</a>;&nbsp;<a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.plantsci.2019.110207" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="_blank" style="color: rgb(5, 99, 193);">Lenaerts&nbsp;<em>et al</em>., 2019</a>). Genetic innovation systems, however,&nbsp;lack&nbsp;institutional&nbsp;standards and&nbsp;processes to&nbsp;systematically involve and&nbsp;empower transdisciplinary teams&nbsp;of social and biophysical scientists&nbsp;in&nbsp;product profiling. This is also important as CGIAR breeding programs are expected to focus more on upstream research (e.g., trait&nbsp;discovery and&nbsp;development) while leaving more of the downstream research on variety adaptation to&nbsp;in-country public and private sector&nbsp;partners (<a href="https://excellenceinbreeding.org/announcement/crops-end-hunger-funders-announce-six-requests" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="_blank" style="color: rgb(5, 99, 193);">EiB, 2020</a>).&nbsp;</p>