Consultative Group on International Agricultural Research Mailing Address: 1818 H Street, N.W., Washington, D.C. 20433. U.S.A. Office Location: 1825 K Street. N.W. Telephone (Area Code 202) 334-8021 Cable Address-INTBAFRAD _.. . From: The Secretariat September 11, 1986 Consultative Group Meeting May 19-23, 1986 Ottawa, Canada MAIN CONCLUSIONSREACHEDAND DECISIONS TAKEN (REVISED) The paper dated August discard it and replace it 20 contained several typOgraphiCal with the attached version. have not been reprinted. errors. Please Please ;, 0 :: retain For reasons of economy, annexes those from the earlier version. The secretariat regrets the inconvenkce. Attachment Distribution CGIAR Members TAC Chairnan, Secretariat, Center Board Chairpersons Center Directors Other Participants Observers and Membera c :--/ Revised September Consultative Group on International Consultative Agriculfural Research 11, 1986 Group Meeting May 19-23, 1986 Ottawa, Canada A mid-term meeting of the Consultative Group was held at the 1. invitation of the Canadian Government in Ottawa from May 19 to 23, 1986. On May 19 the Government of Canada made a presentation to the Group at On May 20 the Group was given a tour of the central Agriculture Canada. The business meeting of the G~OUQ experimental farm at Agriculture Canada. was held at the Government Conference Centre in Ottawa and was opened by Madame Monique Vezina, minister for external relations, on May 20 at midMadame Vezina's address to the Group is attached as Appendix 1. morning. The Chairman of the Group, Mr. S. Shahid Husain, presided over the meetings, and a copy of his opening address to the Group is attached as Appendix II. A list of participants is included as Appendix III. Report by TAC Chairman on 39th Meeting - Agenda Item 4 reported briefly on the work of 2. Professor Guy Camus, TAC chairman, (e.g., ILRAD TAC since ICW 85. Because several of the items of importance Issues) were to be discussed during the EPR, WARDAMid-term Review, Strategic He did, mid-term meeting, Dr. Camus withheld specific comment in his report. however, briefly discuss three ongoing concerns: (i) The program and budget review continues to be a timeand it results in marginal adjustments to consuming process, Therefore, the program and budget study center budgets. conducted by the CGIAR secretariat is of special importance as a starting point for the development of a new program and budget procedure. At its 39th meeting, TAC proposed a list of indicators for budget evaluations and suggested a new plan for sequential review of center programs and budgets at intervals of several years. Discussions with center directors are being held with the expectation that an agreeable procedure can be introduced for the 1987 exercise. Intercenter cooperation, reported Dr. Camus, iS being facilitated by activities such as those at the seminar on farming systems research held at ICRISAT in February. Participants took steps to conform terminology and to increase cooperation in the field. TAC took part in the seminar but has yet to receive the formal report of the meeting. Professor Vernon Ruttan, who was present, is conducting a study on behalf of TAC and the CGIAR secretariat of the program and management review system. There will be a report on the study at ICW 86. (Note: the Ruttan study will be discussed at the mid-term meeting in !?87 - Secretariat.) (ii) (iii) Budgeting, Financial Management, 2 *: in the CGIAR - Agenda Item 5 and Reporting summarized the findings and 3. Mr. Richard Clifford, study director, In general there was no recommendations of the finance and budget study. and the report was considered an important opposition to the recommendations, step forward. (i> The Group agreed that uniform standards of accounting should be applied to all CGIAR centers and implemented in the near future. Uniform standards should result in financial reports that provide fuller disclosure of information in a comparable form. The Group agreed to accept uniform formats for periodic reports on restricted core and special projects and to accept the externally audited financial statements in lieu of separate audited statements for individual grants. The secretariat will consult with donors to ensure that the proposed formats meet their requirements. The Group approved the inclusion of overhead charges in all Percentages special projects carried out by the centers. will vary among centers; however, the basis for the calculation will be the same. With regard to restricted core projects, it is desirable This payment arrangement that donors pay overhead charges. might not be possible for some donors; consequently, the CGIAR secretariat will consult with individual donors. The CGIAR secretariat will also examine the impact of this principle on 1985 restricted activities and report to the Group. There was agreement with the principle of approval of some part of center programs for several years. Recommendations on early pledging, informal indications of future pledges, and disbursement practices were endorsed. Donors will implement these recommendations to the extent feasible; many donors expressed an inability to'pledge for more than one year at a time. The limitation on the centers' working capital--at present, one month's expenditure--will be removed. This step will help centers make more efficient use of contributions, particularly those received late in the year. The secretariat will examine the potential for alternative uses of the stabilization fund but will take into account the concern for transparency of funding practices raised by one donor. Specific proposals will be considered by the Group at future meetings. (ii> (iii> (iv> (VI (vi) (vii) - 3 - (viii) A number of members expressed concern that the World Bank's policy of using its contribution to support approved budget levels masks overall donor priorities expressed in their Others suggested that allocation of funds among centers. without such support the TAC review and Group approval of budgets would be without purpose. The CG secretariat agreed to prepare a paper on World Bank funding to centers for ICW 86. The Group did not disagree with the broad principles underlying the resource allocation process stated in the secreHowever, members expressed concern tariat's commentary. regarding the definition of base and non-base activities proposed in the budget study. The Group noted the progress being made between center directors and TAC in refining the budget process. It asked TAC to review the implementation of this process and report on the progress, Review - Agenda Item 6 (ix) (xl WARDAMid-term Dr. E. T. York, TAC member and chairman of the WARDAMid-term 4. Review panel, led off the discussion with a brief summary of WARDA's When the CG chartered WARDAin 1971, the association's primary history. emphasis was to be on adapting rice technology rather than generating it. However, it gradually became clear that the available technology was not adaptable to West African conditions; new technologies needed to be developed In 1983 the program review panel for the harsh environments in the region. WARDA recommended that WARDAundertake an integrated rice research program. Regrettably, this research complied and initiated such a program in 1985. program is still in the early stages of development. Despite the panel's admiration for the concept of WARDA, members agree that the association is not a viable organization in its present form. Severe problems exist in governance and management, achievements, staff morale, financial support, operations, and facilities. 5. The panel recommended that the CGIAR support a strong rice research program in West Africa but suggested that the support be focused on a West Africa Rice Research Institute (WARRI), to be governed as an autonomous center like other CGIAR centers and include elements of both the WARDAand IITA rice research programs. The panel hoped WARDAwould help in establishing WARRI. 6. The Honorable Famara Ibrahima Sagna, chairman of the WARDAgoverning council and minister of rural development of Senegal, argued that WARDA was working on solutions to rice problems, and he was confident of the association's future as a development and training institution. He assured the Group that most of the specific problems brought out in the report could be remedied. For instance, he was agreeable to eliminating the position of deputy executive secretary. As far as delegating more responsibilities to the Scientific and Technical Council (STC) was concerned, that could be done after consultations with member countries. He pointed out the association had already made progress in transfering authority: at present, the STC . ” i? _ - 4 - approves WARDA's budget and program, controls its activities and examines progress in carrying out its mandate, hires accountants to maintain its books, administers hiring and salaries of staff, and nominates candidates for the position of executive secretary. (The final selection is still made by the board.) Mr. Sagna added that he was shocked that-the mid-term review was presented to the full assembly and not discussed with the African authorities in advance. He said he found the panel's remarks patronizing and Qaternalistic, and he accused the panel of trying to decide what was good for Africa while ignoring the African governments. Mr. Sagna argued that WARDAnow received only 2 percent of the CG 7. pie. If WARDAwere given more, he assured the Group, the association would do everything possible to find acceptable solutions. The door was not closed, he emphasized, but the WARDAstates needed to discuss natters WARDAwas in a weaker position than the donor countries, he further. explained; it depended on them for survival. He said it was as if someone who had educated a child later took that child as his own, disregarding the one who brought it into the world. 8. The minister said he fully understood the donors' concerns over what was done with their funds. He offered to set up a research management committee to ensure accountability if donors felt the STC was not sufficient. The review panel could determine the terms of reference for the committee. (However, several similar committees had alternately been set up at some time to manage donors' contributions.) As far as research was concerned, Mr. Sagna explained it was difficult to separate research from development in Africa. He did not want Africa to be a laboratory used strictly for research; he encouraged scientists to consider their research with an eye toward the country's development. He added that the best way for the CG to help was to make sure that links exist between research and development. Otherwise, he warned, scientists might find the results of their research too impractical to implement. 9. Hr. Sagna asked the donors for six months to reorganize !?ARDA. He reminded the Group that he had just taken over WARDAin January 1986, and he was still learning about its Qroblems. He said that WARDAhad never in its 16 years been given the opportunity to discuss its difficulties with heads of state as other regional organizations were allowed CO do. Another reason for an extension was the need to amend the bylaws of WARDAto reflect changes in its structure, which was not done after the December 1985 meeting. 10. When the discussion resumed on Thursday, Dr. York :;ave a brief Dr. York stressed that statement clarifying some Qoints raised by Mr. Sagna. the panel was not recommending an additional center but was trying to deal with the question of rice research in West Africa. The panel had suggested coordinating the rice research programs at IITA and WARDA. Dr. York pointed out that there were about 36 rice scientists at WARDAand IIT'X, whereas an If !JARDA's integrated program would require ,>nl:? about 30 scientists. program Vere to continue 1s ic was, rhe CGIAR would also have to make a substantial investment in faci.lizLes, because those at WARD.1 were substandard. Therefore, a new rise program at WARRI might prove a better program for less money. - 5 on to Dr. York emphasized that the Group must take definitive action 11. WARDAbefore donor support trimmed the program and caused key personnel leave, or donor support eroded completely. __.. Mr. Husain reported that most of the WARDAdonors had decided to 12. continue funding through 1986. However, some donors thought that the discussions and the relationship between CGIAR and WARDAwere becoming confused. The chairman did not want the CG to break with WARDAin a crisis atmosphere; if a break did occur, it would be difficult to operate in West Africa. He concluded the CG must make one last effort to have a dialogue with West the matter African leaders on a rice research program. IDRC agreed to discuss with West African governments on behalf of the CGIAR. A distinguished individual would help IDRC conduct the negotiations along with a small advisory group from CGIAR. Mr. Alieu Jagne, acting executive secretary of WARDA, said a 13. He then research organization free of political interference was needed. went on to discuss the implications of the Groups' decisions. He pointed out that operating on six-month intervals was very difficult and created quite a Some donors had agreed to help through 1986, but USAID bit of uncertainty. The uncertain financial situation would result funding would be ending soon. in terminating staff members and closing key locations. He asked if WARDA should begin now to terminate staff or try to keep programs going. Mr. Jagne said he would prefer to use funds to continue operations; the option, of course, was conditional upon the funding provisions for 1987. He asked for some commitment for transitional arrangements between 1986 and 1987, adding that WARDAhad not set aside funds for termination costs and that available funds were insufficient to meet severance pay obligations. Mr. Husain responded by stating that the funds promised at Ottawa by donors were to be considered transitional, and that WARDAshould keep its commitments to a minimum. Mr. Husain also asked Mr. Farrar to consult with Mr. Jagne and the donors about meeting termination costs. Mr. Husain closed the session by stating that a final decision on WARDAmust be taken at ICW 86. 14. On Friday Mr. Farrar reported the position as follows: The Group decided that WARDAoperations should be financed through 1986 in order to permit negotiations to take place while maintaining ongoing research programs and training capability. A final decision on WARDAwould be taken at Centers Week 1986. In order to make this decision meaningful, the donors ar'e requested to support WARDAand to permit their funds to be used flexibly over the coming six months except, of course, for paying member state obligations. !Je have positive reactions to this request from a number of donors. Strategic issues - Priorities study - Agenda Item 7 days, on May 15. The CGIAR discussed this item during one and a half 20 and 21, 1986. The discussion was based on: the TAC review of CGIAR Priorities (AGR/TAC/IAR/85/18; CG/86/7/TAC); and Future Strategies - 6 - the Report on a meeting at Bellagio, January 19-24, 1986, entitled Future Strategies for the CGIAR, dated February 7, 1986 ; __ . the paper entitled Elaboration of TAC's Views on Priorities and Strategies (AGR/TAC/IAR/85/18.1>; a paper by the CC Secretariat: Strategic Study - Summary of Contents (CG/86/7). issues: Priorities The chairman suggested and the group agreed to divide the discus16. sion so that four issues would be discussed successively: (a> non-food crops; (b) sustainability, or the interaction between crops and environment; (c) Sub-Saharan Africa; and (d) priorities among commodities. A general discussion would follow on the next day. 17. The chairman then called the introductory presentations. Dr. Klaus Lampe from GTZ reviewed the outcome of the Bellagio meeting and gave information on the background against which these conclusions had been made. The chairman of TAC presented TAC's views elaborated after International Centers Week 1985, the Bellagio'meeting, and TAC's 39th meeting in March 1986. (a> Non-food crops 18. Dr. Alex McCalla of TAC presented this first issue. He said TAC agreed that increased food production alone could not eradicate malnutrition; on the other hand, increased food production was needed. Food crops could be sold domestically or abroad and thus generate income. TAC did not recommend adding any non-food crops to center responsibilities but did encourage attention to such crops in a farming systems context. In the discussion that followed, most speakers were in agreement with the conclusions of TAC. Comments included the problem of income generation as a factor enabling people to get access to existing food; income can be generated by food crops as well as.by non-food crops; the need for the CGIAR to consider the changing environment within which agriculture is operating; and a recognition of the widening gap between the incomes of farmers and those of other (e.g., urban) While human productivity is very low in agriculture in many operators. developing countries, the volume of trade, including international trade, is expanding, and changes may be expected in comparative advantages among countries to produce agricultural products. At the same time the incentives for increasing production are often very weak or lacking. 19. o The chairman drew the conclusion that there was a consensus and little difference of opinion on the issue that the CGIXR maintain its fundamental preoccupation with increasing food production in developing countries Other instituwhile recognizing that aon-food crops are important as well. tions held a comparative advantage over the CGIAR in addressing the genetic There was also a broad consensus on the need to issues for these crops. continue working on non-food crops as part of research programs on production this where it is not yet being done. and farming systems and to initiate Research throughout the CGXR should emphasize income generation and increas-' ing the productivity of farmers and pay more attention to the economic and marketing context in which the farmers operate. (b) Sustainability 7 - In introducing this topic for discussion, Dr. 20. __..Ola Heide of TAC defined sustainability as intensification without resource degradation being He said that there should be no the future measure of technical progress. contradiction between increasing production and doing it in a sustainable approach to commodity research must be considered way. The multidisciplinary in a broad sense and include all the necessary disciplinary inputs related to This scientific and technical knowledge on common factors of production. approach implied collaboration of the CG centers with factor-oriented Trees and shrubs had to be research institutions outside of the CG system. addressed in the context of research programs on production systems. While a small number of delegates were inclined to favor separate 21. research on factors, many advocated this broader definition of the multidisciplinary approach to commodity research, described as a symphony, which allows for factors to be addressed as required by the specific problems of the crop and of its interaction with its physical and socio-economic environThere is a need for aiming not only at conserving the productive base ment. but also at rehabilitating lost capacity. Trees and shrubs research was favored by a number of speakers as an issue that needed to be addressed within the system. The question was how to implement the recommendations relating 22. integrating the required factor research efficiently into the commodity as well as collaborating with the factor-oriented programs of the centers, institutions. to The chairman summarized the debate by observing that, obviously, no 23. one wanted the CGIAR to initiate full-fledged factor research programs. should be addressed through commodityHowever, merely saying that factors oriented multidisciplinary research programs was not sufficient. Taking notice of the new, broader description of this approach introduced by some speakers, he remarked that the Group felt there was a need for TAC to elaborate its views on this issue more explicitly and examine how this approach could be implemented. At the same time it noted that sustainability included rehabilitation of loss productivity, TAC’s elaboration should provide a much more detailed treatment of the link between the work of the centers and key interacting environmental factors, including trees and shrubs. (c> Sub-Saharan Africa 24. Professor Guy Camus introduced the discussion on Sub-Saharan He praised the ideas that came out of the meeting in Bellagio on Africa. this issue and summarized the problems relating to Sub-Saharan Africa using the following list of key words: adaptive research; coordination urgency; and integration of efforts; and decentralization, networking and collaboration with national agricultural research systems. He described the tasks and the characteristics of the mechanisms by which the coordination advocated by the Bellagio group could be implemented. - 8 - the CGIAR was informed of a significant move 25. In the discussion, with the support of the board chairpersons, to taken by the center directors, of IITA with--the task of producing appoint a committee headed by Dr. Stifel the views of the centers on the problem of coordinating their approach of the A majority of the speakers rallied national research systems by themselves. to Professor Camus' use of the word "mechanism" instead of "entity" as a way of stressing the importance of avoiding the build-up of any bureaucratic, screen-forming intermediary layer barring the centers from the necessary direct contact with the national research systems. It was recognized, howrestraint ever, that the very weakness of many of these systems did require in approaching them, in order not to overburden them. The complexity of the African environment, physical as well as socio-economic, called for more Some speakers suggested that a task force location-specific approaches. could address the problem of identifying the research needs for the various sub-regions or countries and could set priorities among these needs. These had to be viewed in the perspective of the opinions of the African research of the necessary communication with the non-CG leaders themselves, institutions and of the opportunities for efficient networking. the chairman found that there was 26. In summarizing the debate, recognition of the urgency and the uniqueness of the African challenge and of the diversity of the African condition with regard to environment and to There was also recognition of the dangers production and farming systems. and the costs of the overlapping that had occurred in the past and of the need for coordination. He noted, however, that no one wanted to impose rigid institutional mechanisms in the name of harmonization and coordination at the risk of creating an additional layer of bureaucracy. He stressed the meaning of the preference for the word mechanism instead of entity, as suggesting the necessary flexibility in coordination as well as the need for bringing the African research leaders into a discussion of the nature of coordination. He stated that beyond the general discussion of coordination and coordination mechanisms, the specifics of this issue had to be spelled out. He accepted suggestions that a task force be set up to address this issue and to identify research needs (initially those of a country or of a region on a pilot basis). The task force will be headed by the chairman of TAC, and include Dr. Sawadogo, Dr. McCalla, Dr. Kasembe, Mr. Caudron, Mr. Wilson, and Dr. App. The task force would have to work closely with the committee appointed by the It should present the CGIAR at center directors and headed by Dr. Stifel. centers week with a specific proposal for the coordinating mechanism(s), the basic issue being the coordination of the programs of the centers in their The chairman also saw a substantial desire work with the African countries. in the Group for an assessment of the research needs in Africa and hoped that TAC could take this into account in further work on priorities. Finally, he observed that there had been no support for immediate independence of the ICRISAT Sahelian Center. There was a preference for dominion status with considerable autonomy in setting up programs and in financial matters, while retaining the essentiai technological link between Hyderabad and Niamey. This did not mean that the issue was closed or that it would not be addressed again in the years to come. 27. Responding to a number of questions about SPAAR, the chairman gave The Special Project on African Agricultural a briefing on this new activity. Research stemmed initially from discussions among center directors but soon was given a separate identity from the CGIAR. SPAAR was based on recognition 2: i that coordination Donors meetings 9 - among the donors was as urgently needed as among centers. and Paris established mechanisms for: in Tokyo, Washington, on donor supported programs and African assembling information projects in Africa; assessing countries technology and research needs in selected (begun in Senegal and Sudan); setting up guidelines for elaborating national strategies in collaboration with the national systems, with ISNAR providing staff support; exchanging information to bring support to national systems; financing coordinating (d) Priorities grants to individual in African about African greater research research harmony in scientists. research. networks agricultural among commodities In his introduction, Dr. Michael Arnold of TAC said that the shifts 28. in priorities were to be understood in relative and not absolute terms. They had to be considered in the global perspective, in which the funding for Thus the CG agricultural research from the CGIAR represents only 2 percent. priorities do not necessarily coincide with what may be the global priorities. He came back to the symphony description of the multidisciplinary, commodityoriented research approach to describe it as a factorial matrix approach, in which the perspectives given by the principal axes bring the diverse factors into play according to their importance for the specific problem at hand. 29. Following Dr. Arnold, a number of speakers insisted on the growing importance of the agriculture in rainfed areas where agricultural production These condiis at higher risks and where rice constitutes the main crop. With these nuances tions pose new and more difficult problems for research. in mind, most speakers agreed with TAC’s conclusions on shifts in priorities. A number of delegates called for more attention to be given to the problems of livestock production research in agreement with TAC’s proposal because animal husbandry is a very important element of many production systems in Africa. 30. Planning would be helped by using quantitative tion of supply and demand for agricultural production done in close collaboration with the center directors. models and would of the evoluhave to be 31. Many speakers emphasized the need for reflection on how the proposed transfer of responsibilities from centers to national systems was to be implemented. There was support for relying on national research systems for a number of tasks for which they are at a comparative advantage over centers, the fine adaptation of technologies to location-specific environmental e.g., requirements. The strength of national systems, however, is highly variable, and they may not all be in a position to take up these new tasks. It was the responsibility of the CG and of its centers to help prepare them to do so. - 10 - Care was needed in asking national systems to assume international functions. It would In any case the shift would have to be gradual and well planned. need to respond to the wishes of the national systemand‘not be imposed by the CGIAR. A proposal was made of an exploratory meeting on the transfer of This meeting responsibility from the CG centers to the national programs. could involve a number of national programs and centers. It would explore the constraints that could limit the activity of a national program undertaking such responsibility and not be imposed by the CGIAR. 32. Among the new ventures, coconut raised concern from some delegates who questioned its overall importance and suspected it might be a rich man's Others said it was important for numerous small holders in a signicrop. ficant acreage in Africa as well as in the Pacific, and these farmers are now in need of replanting their trees. There were specific proposals to support For this commodity, research on this commodity. as well as for the vegespeakers called for a definition of the ways for tables and for aquaculture, implementing TAC's recommendations for CGIAR support and especially on how to establish links with.the existing non-CG institutions in these areas. 33. The chairman concluded by observing that there was broad support of the relative priorities recommended by TAC. He stressed that no one supported the idea of freezing in nominal terms the allocation for any single commodity. As far as wheat and rice were concerned, these cereals had to be addressed in the much more difficult environment of the rural parts of the rainfed areas of Asia, where the bulk of the world's poor still live. This emphasized the need for maintaining the overall quality of research on these crops and stressing impac,t on production and income. But maintaining research had to be done through a changed distribution of work between the international centers and the national systems. This arrangement posed the problem of organizing the relations between the centers and the national systems on an equal footing for partnership, while taking into account the diversity of their capacity to take part in these relations. Modulation was needed, which would call for the centers engaging in a spectrum of diverse activities that would depend upon the strengths and weaknesses of the The input from the centers in the future would cooperating institutions. have to be in terms of more advanced technologies than it used to be. Goal statement 34. The chairman suggested the Group discuss the goal statement for CGIAR, as drafted by the TX and by the Bellagio group. While recognizing the concerns of the Bellagio group , most speakers preferred the goal statement as issued by TAC. They ;Jished only that TAC elaborate a little it in order to incorporate some oE the content of the Bellagio suggestion. the on 35. The chairman concluded chat this issue had to be given back to TAC provided it has saying that there is a strong pr eference for its statement reference to the national research ;:Jstems, and hopefully to income generation, and property. Role of Women 11 - There was a request for a discussion at a future meeting on women 36. and agricultural research, i.e. how research can be directed to benefitting The chairman asked the CG secretariat to arrange a women farmers. discussion. Publication papers It was agreed the the TAC Review of CGIAR Priorities and Future 37. but would be published together with Strategies would not be further revised, a supplementary paper and the conclusions of the Group which modified the TAC would continue to refine many of the issues, in paper in some respects. additional reports or documents. Role of TAC The chairman suggested that the evaluation of priorities should be 38. on how this can be continuous process for TAC. There should be reflection done regularly, in the context of the global environment as this has a bearing on the CGIAR priorities and the programs of the centers. 39. In answering chairman said he fully to prepare a paper for TAC’s chairman. ISNAR External 40. a comment on the amount of work given to TAC, the realized of TAC was overloaded. The cosponsors were ICW 86 on the role and responsibility of TAC and of Review - Agenda Item 8 Dr. Montague Yudelman, chairman of the external program review of ISNAR, presented a brief summary of the panel’s findings. fle said the principal recommendation was that the five-year sunset clause be removed and ISNAR accepted as a full-fledged member of the CGIAR. The increased flow of financial resources to national systems had made the need for ISNAR’s activiISNAR’s performance had earned it ties greater now than when it was founded. the support, confidence, and respect of the national systems that use its services. The panel also suggested that ISNAR focus its activities more than it had in the past. It should remain small and confine itself to a limited range of activities. It should not get involved in extension nor should it become a service institution for other CGIAR centers or a fund raiser for national research systems. ISNAR’s mandate should be modified to remove some unrealistic expectations along these lines. 41. The panel pointed out the need for a strategy that spelled out ISNAR’s goals and objectives. A clearer strategy would help ISNAR make choices when demand for its resources exceeded supply. In determining criteria for national involvement, special consideration should continue to be given to Africa. ISNAR should also leave implementation activities to other agencies and limit its involvement in special projects. The panel recommended that ISNAR continue its emphasis on training and on strengthening its research, especially on priorities and resource allocation. 42. reported services Dr. William Tossell, chairman of the external management review, that ISNAR was well managed, staff morale was good, and support were effective. He added the center was well-sited and developing a - 12 - good reputation with its client countries. However, the review team thought that ISNAR needed better strategic planning and a clearer mandate. He pointed out that demands on ISNAR were more complex than those made on a commodity center; because ISNAR was service-oriented, it had to respond The review team also concluded that the board constantly to outside forces. general should be should be decreased from 15 to 11 members , and the director allowed more delegation of authority. Dr. Robert Cunningham, chairman of the board of ISNAR, responded 43. that the board of ISNAR was receptive to both reviews and was particularly pleased that client countries spoke so positively about ISNAR. The board accepted the need for better strategic planning and fewer members on its board; however, it had reservations about deleting the FAO representative from the board and about restricting special projects, especially in view of the limited core funding available to ISNAR for its operations. 44. Dr. Alexander von der Osten, the newly-appointed director general of ISNAR, agreed that the reviews were fair, useful, and timely, and ISNAR had benefitted from the process. He added that steps had already been taken to improve strategic planning. He had only one principal reservation: removing the FAO representative from the board. Dr. Yudelman and Dr. Tossell replied that the review team's suggestion to remove the FAO representative had received too much emphasis. However, Dr. Yudelman added, the team felt quite strongly on the issue of limiting special projects. 45. In the discussion that followed, several speakers complimented ISNAR on having achieved so much in a relatively short time and said they thought that the center should be accepted as a full-fledged member of the CGIAR system. A few people remarked on the clarity of both reports but said they thought the program review had not been done in sufficient depth. One speaker questioned whether enough time had been set aside for the review and whether enough study had been focused on the impact of ISNAR. 46. Mr. Husain concluded that there was general agreement on several issues concerning ISNAR: (1) it had performed creditably in its early years and should become a full member of the CGIAR system, (2) it should have a clearer strategic plan, (3) it needed a more complete staff but should remain small, (4) its main task should be to advise national research organizations and not get involved in research itself, (5) it should exercise caution in undertaking special projects, but there was a need for flexibility in applying this principle, (6) it should be involved in follow-up but not i:! project implementation or fund raising, and (7) both reviews had been of considerable service to the centers. As far as dropping the FAO representative from the board was concerned, Mr. Husain said that matter was for the board to decide. Broadening Support for the CGIAR - Agenda Item 9 47. Mr. Farrar, executive secretary of the CGIAR, introduced the topic by summarizing the conclusions of the secretariat-produced paper "Broadening Support for International Agricultural Research." There was general agreement that the CGIAR system and the work of the centers should be better known throughout the world and an acknowledgement that this would require continuous, active publicity and promotion by the organizations in the system. is : 13 - Some speakers felt that such promotional work should be the principal function, at least initially, of country support organizations. Several speakers echoed a point made by the chairman: wider recognition of and support for the system were necessary in both developing and developed countries. Views were mixed on whether it was appropriate for country 48. The organizations to solicit support for the centers from private sources. principal concern was whether the system’s objectives might be distorted or Its image impaired by accepting resources from private organizations, Some speakers did not share the particularly corporations or businesses. They argued that broadening support opened up opportunities and concern. that support could be obtained from a range of private groups without laying the system open to undesirable influences or pressures. Mr. Husain concluded that there was general agreement on the need 49. He added that support groups were justifor more promotion and publicity. fiable in some situations. Centers should be prudent in accepting support The secretariat was authorized to proceed from private organizations. cautiously and asked to keep the Group informed on the subject. ILRAD External Program and Management Reviews - Agenda Item 10 chairman of the ILRAD program review panel, 50. Dr. Jos Mortelmans, praised ILRAD for its high scientific standards in carrying out its mandate for research on controlling two major livestock diseases: trypanosomiasis and He added that the program had been difficult to review because theileriosis. of the need to balance the research, the needs of African countries, and questions of the donors. Dr. Mortelmans suggested that ILRAD continue to aim for an immuno51. logical solution to controlling trypanosomiasis, but it should also expand research on chemotherapy and trypanotolerance. This expansion could be funded with savings elsewhere in the trypanosomiasis program. Regarding theileriosis, or East Coast Fever, the panel concluded there is hope for an immunological solution, and recommended that high priority be given to sporozoite research. Again, any shifts in emphasis could be accommodated by redistributing funds already in the program. The panel also recommended that more emphasis be given to cowdriosis, or heartwater. Because cowdriosis is also a tick-borne disease, it might increase if a vaccine for theileriosis were found and livestock dipping were suspended. Therefore, ILRAD should focus at least in a preliminary way on cowdriosis diagnosis and immunology. The panel did not think it’would be necessary to add new positions for the work. The review panel also recommended a stronger training role for ILRAD, particularly in Francophone Africa. 52. Dr. Frank Raymond presented the results of the management review, and he concluded that ILRAD was well-managed. He nevertheless recommended several areas for possible improvement, the main one being IXAD’s middle management. He suggested that ILRAD and perhaps the CG system needed to consider the longer-term career prospects of center-employed scientists for whom there might not be a full career structure within a single center. He also remarked on the substandard facilities being used by the 56 staff members from other centers posted at ILRAD. - 14 - Dr. William Pritchard, chairman of ILRAD’s board, said ILRAD had 53. already begun to implement many of the recommendations and agreed with the need to expand research on chemotherapy and trypanotolerance in the Both panels had recommended- improving research trypanosomiasis program. program coordinators to this program management, and ILRAD agreed to appoint end. The panel and the board disagreed on only one point: the arrangements for appointing staff members at the director level. Because of ILRAD’s history, the board prefers to appoint the directors, in collaboration with the director general. Dr. Pritchard added that about 70 people from other centers are stationed at ILRAD, and the board is aware that the facilities are unsatisfactory. 54. Dr. Ross Gray, director general of ILRAD, reviewed the implications He pointed out that although the of several points in the program review. program panel recommended more sporozoite research be done, the materials for The center favored work on cowdriosis experiments are difficult to obtain. but resources would be needed, which should.not be taken from the existing program. 55. Professor Camus said that not recommend an increase in funding thought that most resource needs in however, could be taken care of by driosis was important, TAC did not TAC, in line with the priority paper, did for livestock disease research. He trypanosomiasis and theileriosis, adjustments in the program. Although cowrecommend taking it up at this time. 56. In the discussion that followed, speakers focused on: (1) whether cowdriosis research should be added, (2) whether the emphasis on trypanosomiasis research should be changed, and (3) whether ILRAD (or other centers) should provide long-term career opportunities. One speaker noted the overall message in the report was “good science at a well-managed center.” Another spoke of the need for more concentration and continuity i’n the CGIAR, for these were considered the major strengths of the system; he expressed concern that ILRAD might be pushed into short-term research at the expense of any long-term efforts needed to combat these difficult diseases. One speaker suggested that any solution to accommodate the people at the ILEMD outpost Dr. Pino, should be studied in the context of a CGIAR strategy for Africa. former chairman of the ILRAD board, stated that he would not recommend a retreat from basic research on trypanosomiasis: animals do survive the disease, which indicates that a tolerance or resistance mechanism exists in nature. Therefore, he reasoned, man might find a way to enhance the natural tolerance of animals. Dr. Xortelmans explained that the panel did not want ILRAD to retreat from trypanosomiasis research, but to reach a balance in studies of natural immunity and acquired immunity to the disease. 57. Dr. Raymond stated that the management panel did not imply that scientist would have a lifetime career at ILRAD, but :hat ILXAD has a responsibility in career development of its staff. 58. Dr. Gray mentioned that eight avenues of research are being conducted on trypanosomiasis, and only one- the variant antLgen approachqay not hold promise. Dr. Gray pointed out that there are many other advances and new tools available for pursuing solutions to the disease. a - 15 - Mr. Husain concluded that there is tremendous satisfaction with 59. there is support for both panels’ recommendations, ILRAD, and generally, Despite some the key word is balance. modified by TAC. In trypanosomiasis, research needs to be pursued, skepticism on the potential for a vaccine, There is also promise of a especially on chemotherapy and trypanotolerance. However, many in the Group were concerned that vaccine for theileriosis. research on cowdriosis might dilute ILRAD’s efforts in trypanosomiasis and theileriosis. Report of Chairman of the Board Chairpersons - Agenda Item 11 Dr. Lennart Kahre, chairman of the board chairpersons, reported on 60. the March meeting of the board chairpersons committee in Rome. The board chairpersons discussed the cost effectiveness of the centers-an issue the donors had raised at the Group’s Tokyo meeting. Center management has the operational responsibility to use funds as efficiently and effectively as possible for the programs approved by the board, and the board should not The board’s role is to ensure that costimpinge on this responsibility. effective procedures are in place and to create a cost-conscious environment Among the recent actions taken by the boards was the estain the center. which meet regularly with external auditors. blishment of audit committees, In March the chairpersons also met with Dr. Vernon Ruttan to 61. discuss his study of external program reviews. Dr. Kahre commented on other topics discussed during the mid-term meeting, particularly on the priority Dr. Kahre also brought up the study and the subsequent Bellagio discussions. proposal--mentioned in the secretariat’s document of February 1986 on the that the Group authorize the boards to reappoint board board of trustees-members to a second term without consulting the Group if the board members had performed well in their first term. The proposal had been endorsed by the chairpersons and the Group was requested to approve it. 62. One speaker mentioned he learned from the secretariat’s document that some boards did not have audit and finance committees, and he thought that every board should have its own committee; he added that the board’s committees should meet more than once a year. He also questioned the chairpersons ’ reappointment proposal, and asked whether any board member had ever been refused a second term. Another speaker answered affirmatively. The chairman of the Group indicated that automatic reappointment by the boards should not take place; instead, board members should turn to the CGIAR when the second term appointment came up for approval. One speaker suggested that the number of women board members be doubled within a year. The chairman replied that he recognized the need for more women board members but wasn’t certain that the goal of doubling the number within a year was realistic. He asked the boards to send his office the names of both women and men suitable for board membership. 63. The chairman urged all boards to examine for controlling expenditures. The chairman stated pursue its study on the performance and effectiveness study would be financed through the special activities were requested to indicate support for this study. discussion on the boards in a subsequent meeting of their internal procedures that the secretariat would of the boards. The account, and donors . There would be a full the Group. Report of the Chairman of Center 16 - Agenda Item 12 Directors Dr. Trevor Williams, vice chairman of the center directors, 64. reported that the center directors had organized several activities, including a new management training course in conjunction with the CGIAR The seminars would cover variasecretariat and three intercenter seminars. and agro-ecological zoning. bility in crop yields, farming systems research, Center directors have also participated with TAC and the secretariat in discussions on the priorities paper and the budget study. Center directors concluded that they have a duty to make their views known to members of the Group and have decided to establish committees to examine some of the broader and more important issues facing the CGIAR system. The first issue to be examined is the centers' role in Africa. 65. intercenter establish sys tea. Members welcomed these initiatives, particularly those to increase cooperation, and were pleased that center directors intended to committees specifically to address the principal issues facing the Report - Agenda Item 14 IBPGR Status 66. The chairman called attention to copies of the correspondence between the Director General of FAO and him and the CGR committee report, which the Group had received. He then called on Lucas Brader of FAO to open the discussion. 67. Mr. Brader said that the Director General of FAO wished to study the possibility of finding practical alternatives before moving toward settlement of some of the broader issues. He had therefore established a senior review committee within FAO headed by the deputy director general to examine specific problems. The committee will study the various issues submitted by the IBPGR and the CGIAR and try to develop practical solutions to facilitate joint work on plant genetic resourceso The situation could be examined after two years and a decision made on a new structure. 68. It was hoped that the issue of office space could be solved by the Italian government’s attempt to remedy the broader issue of space problems of the FAO and other international bodies in Rome. The director general reiterated that all staff members assigned to the IBPGR, whether paid by the trust fund or the FAO, were available full-time to the board. 69. These ideas would be submitted to the working group of the commission on plant genetic resources on June 2 and 3 in Rome. Mr. Brader was confident the plan would be endorsed. The chairman agreed with Mr. Brader that his proposals veta Ln line with those of the CGIAR committee, which had proposed making new nominations to the board, extending contracts of FAO staff working with the IBPGR, and lifting the employment freeze. The committee suggested that scientific talent be provided, if necessary, by agencies in donor countries. If space was ;Iot available, it might be rented. 70. A number of speakers welcomed the progress and hoped that it would lead to a pragmatic adjustment of the management problems identified in the review process, which would enable the IBPGR to continue working within the context of the FAO. Several speakers said that there were clearly separate I -- .. i 17 - l areas of responsibility in the field of plant genetic resources, such as responsibilities of the FAO and those of the CGIAR. The chairman closed the discussion by stating that further progress would be reported at ICW 86. -__.. Future Meetings - Agenda Item 15 71. meetings: The Group approved 1986 1987 ICW mid-year Icw 1988 mid-year ICW 1989 mid-year ICW the following November 3-7, May 18-22, October dates and locations D.C. France D.C. Republic of Germany D.C. for future Washington, Montpelier, 26-30, Washington, Federal May 16-20, October Berlin, 31-November 4, Washington, Australia May 29-June October 2, Canberra, 30-November 3, Washington, D-C. The center directors proposed a new format for their presentations 72. They will make brief, issue-focused presentaat international centers week. Half of the tions to the Group and allow time for discussion afterward. centers will give their presentations one year; the other half will the announced later. One speaker mentioned that he would like to see the centers e.g., a panel discussion on pool their efforts on a particular presentation, a specific subject. Other Business - Agenda Item 16 The CGIAR secretariat presented two requests for use of the special 73. The first request was for approval to use the account activities account. for a project to preserve and distribute CGIAR publications. The second request was to use funds for a management training program for center staff. IDRC expressed support in principle for both projects and indicated that modest funding for the management training program might be forthcoming. NO other comments were made, and in the absence of objections, Group approval was assumed. Chairman’s Closing Remarks - Agenda Item 17 74. The chairman expressed his satisfaction with the discussions and noted that the long deliberations in Washington, D.C. and in Ottawa on the priorities paper had resulted in a well-articulated direction for the CGIXR. He noted that members sometimes tried to forge a plan quickly; but determining priorities was essentially an evolving process in which issues are posed, challenges arise, and are responded to not simply in a narrow, short-sighted fashion but in terms of strategies for the future. He added that strategies and programs must be considered within the overall limitations of’ institutions and resources. New undertakings would require additional resources; ultimately, human resources and organizational structures would pose severe - 18 - As the centers took on new activities, they would limitations on activities. they should consider whether the national have to drop others. Therefore, agricultural research centers could take over some of these activities. The with networking centers should also think about how they can help, especially and coordinating. Mr. Husain expressed gratitude to Professor Camus and his col75. leagues at TAC. He reminded the Group that they would have to look ahead 1987, when there would be a new TAC chairman. A paper was being prepared and the CG secretariat for discussion on the role of TAC, its procedures, role of the TAC chairman, which alone seemed to be a full-time function. added that the center organizations are no less important than TAC, and questions about the relationships between the boards and the central organizations should be explored. to by the He 76. Mr. Husain concluded with special thanks to the government of Canada for making the meeting in Ottawa pleasant and for helping to create the ambiance that had led to constructive discussions. September 11, 1986 . .‘. Annex I Page 1 of 5 SPEECH BY THB HON. MX'lIQUB VBZINA, MINISTER FOR EXTERNAL RELATIONS TO THE MEMBEBSOF THE CGIAR TUESDAP, MAY 20, 1986, 11:00 A.M. OTTAUA, CANADA It is with great pleasure that I welcome you to Canada. I shall begin by congratulating you for your accomplishments within the Consultative Group on International Agricultural Research as well as within the various Research Centers which have joined the CG during the last 15 years. In considering the greatest contribution be to speak from my own humility, of a layman in knowledge you possess* for Canada's development a Canadian woman who in delegation to the Special Crisis in Africa. what I would say to you today, it seemed to me that I could make to the advancement of your work would perspective - the perspective, and I say it in all relation to the highly-specialized scientific It is also the perspective of a minister responsible And finally, it is the perspective of aid programs. one week will be in New York leading the Canadian Session of the United Nations on the Economic An image comes to mind I will begin, then, to speak as a layman. of the medieval princes who must have been continually tempted to torture If I make this somewhat their alchemists in order to speed up their work. unfriendly allusion, it is simply to impress on you the sense of urgency that I feel with regard to your research. On a planet where every year the human beings, where every year the desert land, we have only one recourse if we wish maximum use of arable land, while respecting equilibrium. There is only one solution: production systems. population increases by 17 million swallows 6 million hectares of to feed the world: we must make or restoring ecological to define new techniques, new The seriousness of this question is underlined by the fact that we Canadians live in a country where we know a privileged relationship with nature and its manifestations. A few kilometers from here, one finds forests large enough to get lost in. In my own home area, eastern Quebec, hundreds of lumbermen were brought to the edge of ruin by an insect, the spruce budworm. One only has to walk through our forests and look at our trees and our lakes to appreciate the ravages that acid rain can cause. And I know that some of the presentations which you heard yesterday made you aware of the significance for Canada of the 1886 Act Respecting Experimental Farm Stations and the extent to which agricultural research has contributed to the economic advancement of our own country. ecological, a country Thus, we Canadians accord and forestry research. highest priority to agricultural, Canada was present at the birth of your group, and although we are of fewer than 30 million people, I believe I am right in saying . Annex I Page 2 of 5 most research that we have been and that we are still among the three or four important financial supporters of the international agricultural centers. In fact, each of is a partner in cooperation we are spending $14.8 million about 10 percent over last of our domestic departments percent because of the tight the 13 research centers for us and we contribute Canadian to this end, year's contribution. It have seen their budget budgetary situation in that belong to,your group financially. This year, which is an increase of is worth noting that most increases limited to 3 Canada. And of course, I must make mention of ihr role of the Canadian International Research Centre (IDRC), which is aciively engaged in agricultural research and has played an important role in the establishment of the International Center for Agricultural Research in the Dry Areas (ICARDA). You have probably noticed, over the pas': couple of minutes, that I am beginning to sound more like the minister 'than a layman. What I wish to say, in the name of the Government of Canada, is that you can count on our support. Despite the sense of urgency and our strong desire to see your research advance as quickly as possible, we will avoid any comparison to the On the contrary, we know that our torturers to whom I alluded earlier. commitment must be within the long-term perspective that would relieve some of your administrative concerns and allow you the security necessary to carry out your work. Since I have donned my ministerial hat, I would like to share with you a few comments which are the results of consultations I have had with my officials and with our partners in the developing countries. You are about to begin your discussions, to identify plans of action, to develop strategies. The direction that you will take will have extremely important repercussions for the entire world and especially for Africa. Depending on the research paths you follow, in 25 years or even in 10 years, millions of people could either have enough to eat or die of hunger. My first comment is related to the deterioration of the ecological environment, a subject that Canada considers a matter of gravest concern. During the past two years we have lived with the tragic consequences of soil erosion, desertification, and deforestation. I am pleased to see that you have identified this problem as one of your research priorities, and that agro-forestry will be an integral part of the strategies that you will discuss. Second, as concerns food production, we consider that no solution should be adopted unless two questions can be answered in the affirmative. First of all: Will the proposed solution be conducive to lasting food production? Second: Will this solution improve the lot of the poorest, of the disinherited whom we wish to help? '. ._ . Annex I Page 3 of 5 The first question deals with systems of production. It is a High-yield crops that deplete the soil seriously critical question. Any new system of production must be viable in the compromise the future. long term; it must respect the ecological equilibrium, which is so fragile especially in Sub-Saharan Africa. The second question is of a social nature. It is now generally recognized that agricultural advancement has not always benefiiied ihe it has even widened the gap between the poor and ihe On occasion, poorest. especially in countries where social inequalities more wealthy cultivators, were more pronounced. How can one avoid By concentrating both ecologically this situation? that are under-privileged, the poor on and iubers; and our efforts on regions and economically; by concentrating research on food cultivation for sorghum, on'millet, on maize, on maniac, on roots by developing by being techniques with a high manpower co-efficient; particularly aware of women. majority" It is high time to include in our planning this particular "silent that has been crushed under the weight of poverty and work. My third comment concerns the national it would be very difficult to translate your into concrete form. research systems without which efforts and your discoveries The national systems and ihe multilateral systems should be complementary and interdependent. The regional or international organization should support national research; of course, some countries are unable to set up the kind of organizations capable of carrying out ihe advanced research that is so critical. On the other hand, other countries, like Brazil and India, enjoy highly advanced,national systems. A recent study carried out by your group showed that the best results have been obtained in countries ihai have such systems and where effective coordination exists. Allow me to make one final comment. The scientific breakthroughs that you might make are not, in themselves, sufficient to solve ihe food problem. Your discoveries will have no impact on produciion as long as ihey are restricted to experimental research stations. They cannot be "transplanted" into the farmer's field without the will of ihe governments of the countries themselves, without having adequate resources in place, without technicians and instructors, without appropriate policies, without incentives to production. In other words, without a sustained effort ai the naiional level, there is no hope. On this basic point, I can assure you of our support. I have clearly indicated recently that our country-to-country cooperation programs will be directly proportional to the efforts our partners will make to ensure their own food security. Annex I Page 4 of 5 I referred ihe economic crisis earlier in Africa to the Special Session of the United Nations that will take place in New York next week. on Canadians were deeply moved by the food crisis that afflicted Africa in 1984. Their response to help the people affected by ihe famine was Individual Canadians contributed more than $60 million to remarkable. A recent national poll indicates that more than voluntary organizations. half of my fellow citizens said that they were involved personally and contributed to this international relief effort.. The Canadian Government responded with the same vigor. First of all, in ihe emergency phase, we set up a special office whose role was to coordinate the overall Canadian effort for help and humanitarian aid. Following the termination of this emergency office, I announced in ihe House of Commons a plan of action we call Africa 2000. that will that will programs Basically, we wish to focus on a long-term development philosophy continue to draw on the dynamism present in Canadian society and focus on agriculture as the absolute priority sector for our on that continent. Africa is at the center of our concerns. I know it is of particular concern to you as well. Your president, Mr. Shahid Husain, will chair a special group set up to respond to the needs of Africa (SPEAR). I do not have to tell you about the situation of agriculture in Africa. What makes it a particularly difficul i case is the extreme diversity in climatic conditions and ecological conditions. It is the scarcity and the unevenness of rainfall. It is the number of cereals and leguminous foods that have only been researched in a limited way. It is a lack of financial resources for agricultural research. It is food pricing policies that penalize these countries. Granted, the list of problems is very long, but there is another point: the African crisis could probably have been avoided if we had carried out massive research efforts on this continent over the last quarter century. The inhabitants, the land, and the harvests of Africa and semi-arid zones have been, ih my opinion, neglected for too long. The 1970s saw the dawning of an evolution. Every CGIAR center now consecrates one or several programs to some aspect of African agricultural production. research program on I am aware, of course, of your excellent maniac. The IITA has already created 100 varieties of the most important leguminous plant in Africa, niebe. These are two examples among many others. But progress has been limited and has come too late. A decade is not very long in the field of research, certainly not long enough to prevent famine. a World Bank report painted an uncomfortable picture Last February, of agricultural research in Africa. This report put the finger on what constitutes enormous obstacles to progress: confusion, duplication of efforts, frequent changes of direction, and a contradictory body of studies and proposals. This is perhaps an unpleasant picture for us to accept. : ” -- . . .. Annex I Page 5 of 5 accomplish nothing, the truth. However, we must recognize Otherwise, we will and we will bear the responsibility for future famines. Your group was created precisely to avoid this type of confusion I am convinced that, while respecting the and lack of coordination. necessary autonomy of each of your centers, you can ensure that the work of each one is integrated into a coherent whole that will respond to the needs of Africa in the next century. In conclusion, then, the challenge I inviie you to accept is the same one I offered my collaborators at the Canadian International Development Our objective is not to be the biggest, the best, or ihe first. Agency. Rather, it is important that, within our own scale and our own means, we be the most pertinent, the most aware, and - why not? - the best. I wish you luck. It is important to each and every one of us that I wish you very good deliberations. It was a pleasure to be you succeed. here this morning. Thank you very much. J -- ‘.. Annex II Page 1 of 4 SPEEXJ3BYMR.S. SHAHIDWSAIN TO TEE MEMBERS OF THE CGIAR TUESDAY, MAY 20, 1986, 11:OO A.M. OTTAWA,CANADA Honorable Minister, Board Chairmen, Center Members of the CGIAR, TAC Chairman Directors, Ladies and Gentlemen. and Members, Group on I speak for all of us associated with ihe Consultative International Agricultural Research in expressing our pleasure and gratitude at Canada's invitation to us to share in the centenary celebration of her Yesterday we were privileged to hear about the agriculiural research system. particularly about the development history of Canada's agricultural research, These are of Canola and the contribution to arid and semi-arid agriculture. of direct relevance to agriculture in developing countries, and Canada's contribution to increasing food production in the Third World is impressive indeed. In keeping with your country's tradition, you, Madame Minister, have expressed your desire to share your expertise with institutions serving ihe We are grateful that you have less privileged, particularly in Africa. chosen this forum to renew your country's commitment to help in eliminating hunger. We in the CGIAR expect to continue being your partners in this endeavor. It is a cooperative venture of The CGIAR is a labor of love. . . international institutions, and private foundaiions scientists, governments, to broaden opportunities for people engaged in agriculture in developing countries and ultimately to alleviate hunger and poverty. It does not have a charter or constitution. But it works because there is a broad consensus over its objectives and the unrelenting commitment to these of everyone involved. There are hundreds of us concerned with research, management, and fund raising, but we know each other and the dialogue and discussion is free and professional. Your country is a major contributor, directly and through IDRC. You provide funds, and - no less important - scientists and managers. There are Canadians in the Technical Advisory Committee, in the centers, and two of the chairmen of the boards of trustees of the international centers are Canadians. Any history of our system will not be complete without the mention of the contributions of David Hopper and Joe Hulse, two of the eminent Canadians associated with it. Agriculture Canada has had the main responsibility for the organization of our meeting. I want to thank them in particular for the excellent arrangements they have made for a meeting more complex than we normally expect. The CGIAR has been in existence for about a decade and a half. Of course, some of the centers in the system existed before, and, in fact, the path-breaking work on wheat and rice had begun earlier. You will remember that until the mid-seventies there was a widespread expectation of recurring famine in Asia, particularly in South Asia. Until the late seventies few expected that Indonesia would be able to produce enough rice for its . l . . Annex II Page 2 of 4 population. But fortunately the current reality in Asia is much better than of wise and concerned people in the early even the be st expectations Populous countries such as China, India, Indonesia, and Pakistan seventies. are no longer net importers of grains. Though much of their populations still live at low levels of nutrition and these populations are growing, there is still substantial untapped potential for increased food production. An issue in these countries may well be diversification away from basic food Similarly in Latin America there has been a steady growth in food grains. production, though the rate of growth in the 1970s was below ihe population growth rate for the continent as a whole. There were, of course, wide variations among countries. Agricultural research cannot claim all the credit for this spectacular In many parts of Asia and Latin America, government policies performance. have stimulated agricultural investment and growth. There has been increased fertilizer production and use, and, most of all, in Asian countries there have been massive investments in irrigation and water management. But all of this could not have produced and sustained the "green revolution'* had CIMMYT not developed the dwarf wheat varieties and had IRRI not developed the dwarf rice varieties. And subsequently there has been unrelenting work to breed disease resistance and tolerance to varying soil and climatic conditions. Institutions supported by the CGIAR have played a key role in this revolution for humanity and peace. One of our scientists, Norman Borlaug, received the Nobel Prize for his work on wheat. Any system needs periodic evaluations of its achievements and so do we. We recently commissioned a study by independent experts, supervised by scientists and economists who are not part of the CG system, to examine and assess the impact of the CGIAR institutions on food production and management of agriculture in developing countries. The study - which came to be known as the Impact Study - found that most of the tangible economic benefits of the system could be traced to the modern wheat and rice varieties adapted by national research systems from genetic material provided by the international centers. These varieties cover half the total area under wheat and rice in developing countries. They yield about 50 million tons more than the traditional varieties would have yielded under similar conditions. The additional grain is sufficient to feed 500 million people. National systems have also used and propagated high yielding and disease resistant varieties of sorghum, potato, cassava, chickpeas, cowpea, millet, durum wheat, and forage grasses, which originated in the international centers. Contrary to the belief in some circles, the poor and small farmers have been major beneficiaries of this green revolution. The increased yields made possible by the new varieties have transformed many marginal holdings to productive ones and many subsistence peasants to commercial farmers. Relative to all other prices, food prices have declined in developing countries and consumers have been important gainers. Beyond the increase in food production, international centers have trained a large number of scientists who have taken advanced techniques of research to their national institutions. They have led to the acceptance of the view in developing countries that research with sharply focused Annex II Page 3 of 4 By working objectives can yield perceptible results in terms of production. with national institutions they have contributed to their capacity to adapt and ultimately to take over some of the breeding work done in international centers. can - rest on But indtitutions cannot - any more than individuals The task of mobilizing science to alleviate poverty their past achievements. A recent study on food security conducted by the and hunger is unending. World Bank shows that, despite the green revolution, some 340 million people in the Third World have insufficient diets, so that their health is at serious risk and children may have stunted growth. And another 400 million people may not have adequate diets for a fully productive life. Two thirds of the undernourished live in Asia and another fifth in Sub-Saharan Africa. In absolute terms their numbers have increased in Asia and Africa during the in Asia there has been a decline relative to the past decade, although the growth of populaiion continues In the developing countries, population. Despite some recent declines in fertility, the situation is at a rapid pace. particularly serious in Africa and parts of South Asia. The situation in For more than a decade , per capita food production has Africa is well known. There is hardly any African country where the rate of been declining. where the population would population growth is less than 3 percent, i.e., There are some where the rate of populaiion growth double in about 20 years. There are clear signs of the deterioration of environments as is 4 percent. a result of population pressure. So the challenge that our system faces is clear: how to maintain the momentum of improvement in production and incomes of the rural population in Asia, Latin America, and the Middle East and how to pull African agriculture out of stagnation and decline. There will be many aspects to this. Clearly developing countries will be the key actors. It is their policies, their investments and their management that will lay the foundation of growth and development. Foreign aid has a key role to play in transfer of technology and capital. But let us not underestimate the contribution that scientists organized in research institutions have to make. And this is the challenge which has to be the our system for the rest of this century. We have questions in the Technical Advisory Committee and ad hoc committee that met in Bellagio. The entire this week grappling with this issue. But here let questions that occupy us. basis of the priorities of been addressing these lately at a meeting of an Group will spend much of me outline some of the The world as a whole has ample food and the world as a whole is likely to have ample food in the foreseeable future. Hunger is associated not simply with the inadequate production of food by those who are likely to consume it but by the failure of incomes. No doubt, many poor are producers and consumers of food. But research systems have to focus increasingly on comparative advantages and on the generation of income in rural areas. A second issue and one growing in importance is resource management. In many parts of the world and in most spheres of economic activity, rapid development of technology has enabled production to transcend ihe immediate .C .. Annex II Page 4 of 4 ; limitations of physical resources. But it is increasingly apparent that the postponed costs of development are taking a toll on production and development - water logging and salinity in the Indus Basin is a case in In parts of Africa, as the tree cover is destroyed in quest of fuel, point. wood, and cultivable land, there is a growing risk of decline in fertility and possibly of a decline in rainfall. That brings me to Africa. After possibly two decades in which incentive systems have tended to be biased against agriculture, there are in many countries ihe beginnings of positive and supportive policies for agricultural development. Agricultural markets are being freed, so that the disincentives that were inherent in controlled prices and monopolistic procurement are being removed. Increasing proportions of government investments are being directed to rural areas, and research and extension systems are being strengthened. But simultaneously we in the CGIAR are asking whether our modes and organization are sufficiently responsive to the variability of African situations such as the weakness of national research organizations, ecological diversity, the large number of commodities in African agriculture, and the importance of production systems. In Africa, as in Asia, the land frontier is not expanding, thereby reducing the land holdings of smallholders and/or forcing the incorporation In the absence of a rapid into production systems of marginal lands. improvement in agricultural technology, there is the prospect of increasing the number of landless and the migration to cities. The challenge for research is to find ways of improving incomes for progressively smaller holdings while finding ways to maintain the fertility of soils and improve the productivity of marginal lands. All this will not be done by research. Investments and policy will have to play their roles. While saying ihis, I do not want to appear to underestimate the tremendous effort, cost, and innovation that is entailed. The CGIAR system is devoting more than 40 percent of its resources to Africa. The needs of Africa are great and more needs to be done. But considering the issues of poverty and agriculture in other parts of the developing world, we cannot afford to divert resources within a constant pool. There will be a need for additional resources if we are adequately to address the issues I have mentioned. So as you can see, while we have a reasonable basis for pride in our our agenda for the future is crowded. The most difficult tasks are past, ahead of us: the diversification of Asian agriculture, reinvigoration of African agriculiure, raising the capacity of national research organizations, increasing the productivity of arid and semi-arid lands, and continuously raising ihe threshold of technology. We shall need all the determination and organizational capacity we can mobilize. Our consensus may be frayed in the process, but we shall have to find ways to restore it. And as with all living and dynamic organizations, we should constantly question ourselves. With changing circumstances, our own organizations may have to evolve. Let me conclude by saying to our Canadian hosts capital and your kind hospitality provide the perfect begin tackling the daunting issues ahead of us. that your beautiful environment in which to a ‘. Annex III Page 1 of 17 CONSULTATIVEGROUPON INTERNATIONAL AGRICULTURALRESRARCH S. Shahid Husain Vice President, Operations The World Bank Washington, D.C. Policy INTRRNATIONALAGRICULTURALRESRARCR CENTERS Centro International William E. Tossell Chairman John L. Nickel Director General de Amicultura Tropical (CIAT) Centro International de Meioramiento de Maiz y Trigo (CIMMYT) Donald Winkelmann Director General Richard L. Clifford Financial Officer Clive James Deputy Director General Centro International de la Papa (CIP) Richard L. Sawyer Director General International Board for Plant Genetic Resources (IBPGR) Lennart Kahre Chairman J. Trevor Williams Director N. Murthi Anishetty Assistant Director J. H. W. Holden ' Senior Advisor ‘5 ‘. Annex III Page 2 of 17 = -RS INTRmAT10NBL AGRICDLTDRALRESRARCH International (1-A) Center for Agricultural Research in the Dry Areas Mohamed A. Nour Director General G. Jan Koopman Deputy Director General International Crops Research Institute Tropics (ICRISAT) Fenton V. MacHardy Chairman Leslie D. Swindale Director General William T. Mashler Board Member for the Semi-Arid International Dick Food Policy Research Institute (IPPRI) de Zeeuw Chairman John W. Mellor Director Loraine W. Halsey Director of Finance and Administration International Institute Jr. of Tropical Agriculture (IITA) John McKelvey, Chairman Laurence Stifel Director General David McDonald Computer Manager W. M. Steele International Livestock Center for Africa (ILCA) B. Grandin Anthropologist Guido Gryseels Assistant to Director General Annex III Page 3 of 17 INTEXNATIONALAGRICDLTDRALR.RSRARCHCRNTERS International (ILRAD) Laboratory for Research on Animal Diseases W. R. Pritchard Chairman Arthur R. Gray Direetor General John J. Doyle Director of Research G. Gettinby Consultant, J. Jahnke P. Roger Rowe Director of Administration Professor International Schwabe Training & Information Services F Rice Research Institute (IRRI) Kenzo Hemmi Chairman M. S. Swaminathan Director General International mNAR) Service for National Agricultural Research Robert K. Cunningham Chairman Alexander von der Osten Director General Howard Elliott Senior Research William K. Gamble Former Director Officer General Coenraad A. Kramer Administrative Officer Annex III Page4 of 17 - INTERNATIONAL AGRICULTURAL RESRARCHCENTERS West Africa Rice Development Association (WARDA) Famara Ibrahima Sagna Chairman, Governing Council and Minister of Rural Development, Moctor Toure Chairman, Alieu STC Secretary Senegal M. B. Jagne Acting Executive James E. Johnston Director Scientific Staff Yr. Mbodj of Research & Development Department Robert I. Ayling LJSAID Project Manager II . Annex III Page 5 of 17 DELRWIONS OF MRMBERS OF TEE CONSULTATIVJX GROUP African Development Bank Grayson R. Nanthambwe Operations Advisor Central Projects Unit African Development Bank Abidjan, Ivory Coast Asian Development Bank Kunio Takase Director Irrigation and Rural Development Asian Development Bank Manila, Philippines Department Australia Rodney C. Hills Director UN and Commonwealth Section Australian Development Assistance Canberra, Australia R. C. Manning Deputy Director General Australian Development Assistance Canberra, Australia Gabrielle Persley Research Program Coordinator Australian Centre for International Canberra, Australia Bureau Bureau Agricultural Research Canada Carolyn MeAskie Director General Multilateral Technical Cooperation CIDA Ottawa, Ontario, Canada Stephen Free Deputy Director Multilateral Technical CIDA Division Cooperation Division Annex III Page6 of 17 - OF TEE CONSULTBTIVEGE(oup DELJZGATIONS OF MEMBERS Canada (continued) Don Kirkland International Research Agriculture Canada and Development Greg Spendjian Senior Program Officer Multilateral Technical CIDA Gaston Acting Natural CIDA Cooperation Division Grenier Chief, Agriculture Resources Division Sector . 'ties Commission of the European Commml J. L. Chiltz Principal Administrator Commission of the European Brussels, Belgium (EEC) Communities Denmark Lauritz Holm-Nielsen University of Aarhus Aarhus, Denmark Theis Truelsen Counsellor Royal Danish Embassy Ottawa, Ontario, Canada Federal Republic of Germany Thomas Schurig Head, Agricultural Section Agricultural Research and Rural Development Federal Ministry for Economic Cooperation (BMZ) Bonn, Federal Republic of Germany Dieter Bommer President, ATSAF BOM, Federal Republic of Germany . Annex III Page 7 of 17 DRLEGATIONSOF MEMBERS OF TED3CONSULTATIVEGROUP Federal BOM, Republic Wilbert Federal of Germany (continued) Himminghofen Ministry of Agriculture (BML) Federal Republic of Germany Klaus J. Lampe Head, Department of Agriculture,, Health and Rural Development Deutsche Gesellschaft fur Techn. Zusammenarbeit Eschborn, Federal Republic of Germany (GTZ) (FAO) Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations C. H. Bonte-Friedheim Assistant Director General Agriculture Department Rome, Italy Mohamed S. Zehni Director Research and Technology Rome, Italy Development Division Ford Foundation Norman R. Collins Program Officer-in-Charge Rural Poverty and Resources New York, N.Y., U.S.A. Program France Louis Caudron Chef du Departement, Recherche en Cooperation pour le Developpement Ministere de la Recherche et de la Technologie Paris, France Jean Baptiste Fournier Emmanuel Salmon Legagneur Guy Vallaeys Chairman, Intermin. Committee Agricultural Research Paris, France F. Vicariot for International . . ‘. ,’ Annex III Page 8 of 17 DELEGATIONSOF MEMBERS OF THE CONSULTATIVEGROUP India Sunder Kumar Embassy of India Ottawa, Ontario, Canada Intel-Americaa Development Bank (IDB) John A. Pino Advisor Agricultural Sciences Washington, D. C. Charles A. T. Skeete Senior Advisor Plans and Programs Department Leonor Vera Review and Re-evaluation Officer International Bank for Research and Development (IBRD) G. Edward Schuh Director Agriculture and Rural Development Washington, D.C., U.S.A. International Development Research Department Centre (IDE) Hubert G. Zandstra Director Agriculture, Food and Nutrition Ottawa, Ontario, Canada Robert Auger Secretary and General Geoffrey Associate Hawtin Director, Counsel CAPS Program Assistant Sciences Liliana Wagner Executive Scientific Annex III Page 9 of 17 DELEGATIONSOF MEMBERS OF TBE CONSULTATIVEGROUP International Fund for Agricultural Advisor Development (IFAD) Abbas Kesseba Senior Technical Rome, Italy Ireland Michael James Flanagan Senior Inspector Department of Agriculture Agriculture House Dublin, Ireland Italy Gian Tommaso Scarascia-Mugnozza Chancellor University of Tuscia Viterbo, Italy Japan Takashi Ueda Off i&al, Economic Cooperation Ministry-of Finance Tokyo, Japan Motoji Kodaira Second Secretary Embassy of Japan Ottawa, Ontario, Canada Bureau The Netherlandk Willem van Vuure Senior Research Officer Ministry of Agriculture and Fisheries Wageningen, The Netherlands Hans Wessels Research and Technology Program Ministry of Foreign Affairs The Hague, The Netherlands .. Annex III Page 10 of 17 DELEGATIONSOF MEMBERS OF TEE CONSULTATIVEGROUP Nigeria S. A. Lagos, Adetunji Nigeria Norway Harald Hostmark Coordinator Norwegian Ministry Oslo, Norway of Development Cooperation Amos Njoes Rector Agricultural University Aas-NLH, Norway of Norway Rockefeller Foundation Agricultural Sciences Alva A. App Director, Division for Rockefeller Foundation New York, N.Y. U.S.A. Robert Herdt Agricultural Economist c/o International Food Policy Washington, D.C., U.S.A. Joyce M. Moock Associate Director, Gary H. Toenniessen Associate Director, Division Division Research Institute for for Agricultural Agricultural Sciences Sciences Spain F. Javier Garcia-Ramos Technical Adviser Instituto National de Investigaciones Madrid, Spain Agrarias .L* . . r . . . . Annex III Page 11 of 17 DETJZGATIONS OF MEMBERS OF TEE CONSULTATIVEGROUP Sweden Bo Bengtsson Director General Swedish Agency for Research Cooperation Developing Countries (SAREC) Stockholm, Sweden Staffan Wrigstad Counsellor Embassy of Sweden Ottawa, Ontario, Canada with Switzerland ,Paul Egger Agricultural Advisor Swiss Development Cooperation Bern, Switzerland United Kingdom A. T. Wilson Under Secretary, Natural Resources Overseas Development Administration London, U.K. J. C. Davies Deputy Chief, Natural Overseas Development London, U.K. Division Resources Division Administration A. E. Ray Higher Executive Officer, Natural Overseas Development Administration London, U.K. United Resources Division Nations Development Programme (DNDP) Timothy Rothermel Director Division for Global and Inter-regional United Nations Development Programme New York, N.Y., U.S.A. Projects Annex III Page 12 of 17 d . DELEGATIONSOF MEMBERS OF TEE CONSULTATIVEGROUP U&ted States Science and Technology Nyle C. Brady Senior Assistant Administrator for Bureau for Science and Technology USAID Washington, D.C., U.S.A. D. C. Aeker Ageney Director-Designate USAID for Food and Agriculture Anson R. Bertrand Director Office of Agriculture Bureau for Science and Technology USAID Dana G. Dalrymple Agricultural Economist Bureau for Science and Technology USAID Calvin African USAID Martin Region Jerry Wood Acting Deputy USAID Director for African Regional Affairs Representing Africa (Guinea and Tanzania) Research Agricultural Network Research Oua N'Diaye Head, Agricultural Foulaya National t/o FAO Office Conakry, Guinea Institute Jonah Kasembe Director General Tanzania Agricultural Research Dar Es Salaam, Tanzania Organization 1 I’ I . ‘. DELEGATIONSOF HEMBERS OF TEE CONSDLTATIVEGROUP Representing Asia and Paeifie (Pakistan and Thailand) Amir Muhammed Chairman Pakistan Agricultural Islamabad, Pakistan Research Council (PARC) Praphas Weerapat Rice Research Institute Ministry of Agriculture and Cooperatives Bangkhen, Bangkok, Thailand Representing Latin Bmeriea Region (Argentina and Colombia) Fernando Gomez-Moncayo Gerente General Institute Colombiano Agropeeuario Bogota, Colombia E. R. Moscardi Advisor to the Secretariat Buenos Aires, Argentina (ICA) of Agriculture Representing Near East Region (Egypt and Libya) Abdel-Rahim Shehata Director General Agricultural Research Cairo, Egypt Center Representing Southern and Eastern (Portugal and Romaaia) J. Carvalho Cardoso Director Estacao Agronomica National Oeiras, Portugal Europe Region Annex III Page 14 of 17 OTEIER PARTICIPANTS International Board for Soil Research aud Management (IBSRAM) C. Frederick Bentley Chairman Marc Latham Director International m=uw Ian Smith Director General Center for Living Aquatic Resources Management General James Storer Special Advisor International Irrigation Mauagement Institute (IIMI) Robert K. Cunningham Board Chairman ILRAD External Program Review J. Mortelmans Chairman ISNAR External Program Review Montague Yudelman Chairman ILRAD External Mauagearent Review Frank Raymond Chairman William Tossell Chairman Annex III Page 15 of 17 OTEERPARTICIPBNTS John Barnes Electronic Publishing Group University Microfilms Ann Arbor, Michigan, U.S.A. Pauline A. Smillie Product Manager, Distributed Electronic Publishing Group University Microfilms Ann Arbor, Michigan, U.S.A. Nicole Massignon Senior Administrative Aid Management OECD Paris, France Officer Databases Sheila McLean c/o The World Bank Washington, D.C., U.S.A. Dilip Mukerjee c/o The World Bank Washington, D.C., U.S.A. Martin Pineiro Director General, IICA San Jose, Costa Rica Vernon Ruttan Department of Agricultural and Applied University of Minnesota St. Paul, Minnesota, U.S.A. Economics Annex III Page 16 of 17 t TECHNICAL ADVISORY COMHITpeE (TM3 Guy Camus Chairman Paris, France Eduardo Mexico, Alvarez-Luna D.F., Mexico Michael H. Arnold Cambridge, England Ola M. Heide Aas-NLH, Norway Emil Javier Laguna, Philippines Alexander F. McCalla Davis, California, U.S.A. Abdoulaye Sawadogo Abidjan, Ivo-ry Coast E. T. York, Gainesville, Jr. Florida, U.S.A. Tomio Yoshida Ibaragi, Japan TAC SECRETARIAT John H. Monyo Executive Secretary Rome, Italy Patricia Roberts-Pichette Deputy Executive Secretary Rome, Italy L. H. J. Ochtman Senior Agricultural Rome, Italy Research Officer Annex III Page 17 of 17 CGIAR SECRETARIAT Curtis Farrar Executive Peter Secretary Secretary Greening Deputy Executive Rudolf Binsack Technical Consultant Doreen E. Calvo Senior Program Officer Anne Coulter Research Assistant Fund Raising Unit HeMie Deboeck-De Zutter Financial Officer Eleanor Frierson Librarian James E. Humphries Conference Officer Be1 V. Liboro Staff Assistant Donald L. Plucknett Scientific Advisor Max R;Lves Technical Consultant Edward W. Sulzberger Information Officer Ravindra M. Tadvalkar Senior Financial Officer